of james blaine. >> on this vote, the senate passes over the weekend. it was 229-193. here it is. the house and senate still have work to do. we will find that your thoughts on the debate so far. the house spent all day today on it. we want to find out what your thoughts on it. how important it is to you, what is the role and to is to blame. here is the number to call if you are a democrat. 202-585-3886, republican

585-3 going to show you a good bit of the house to885 earlier. where also like to share your reaction from the -- we are also going to share your reaction from the vote. a reminder to the conversation from this morning from "washington journal" is still open. you can post your comments on line. danielle is covering the debate in house today. what does that vote mean? >> it includes the unemployment

insurance will not become law. this was the two month extension. instead they have rejected it. they said they want to go to the conference committee with the senate and work out their differences. >> it became clear that other republican leaders are feeling that way. they have done their work. the house bill was 36-30. it reside in senate. what do they want to the senate to do? >> they informed us that they what a yearlong extension of the payroll tax cut benefits and a two-year extension of the mechanism that shortens its to treat medicare patients. the also want the keystone provision.

they laid out some regulations. another resolution affirming that position. it is a year-long payroll ability. to the weekend. what was the point of the senate passing a two month extension? >> it was something he called on the senate to do. >> he said we will not do it. they need the senate to act. as it became clear or as it seems, they struck a deal with harry reid to extend this period they have more time to they can go home for christmas and try to strike a deal for the balance of the year. >> what happens if december 31 rolls around and nothing is done? >> that would not be good.

a lot of people will have taxes couple up by something like $1,000 for the average worker. to the unemployment benefits will expire. doctors will lose about 27% of their income from medicare. that would not be good for the next the people or for the election process. a lot of these are politicians. >> can president obama extend the deadline by executive authority? is a possible that the house and senate can come back after the new year and pass a bill retroactively? >> they can pass something retroactively. i am not sure about the authority. there is some precedent for doing something retroactive. in may come down to that. >> daniel newhauser, thanks. we will get your phone calls,

too. what are your thoughts on the payroll house debate? let's go first to our democratic line. >> the payroll tax extension was shortened because the republicans would not have billionaires' pay a small tax for a laundry extension for the year. that is what it is all about. did they do not want to tax the wealthy. the republicans are trying to pressure president obama into signing on to the keystone pipeline. did they insist the pipeline will create 20,000 jobs in the beginning and then 100,000 more. that is always debatable. >> that did become part of the senate bill over the weekend. >> they are still trying to put pressure. the republicans, if they really cared, why did they support the president's job bill?

it would create hundreds of thousands of jobs. in infrastructure and construction. >> we will bring you the president's comments in just a moment. here is alan in kentucky. >> thank you for c-span. go ahead with your comments. >> i have been listening to this. i've been lucky enough to stay home. it is typical of what is happening in our country. i am fed up. i am changing my party. i voted against your party. >>i am fed up with both parties. host: who is a representative in kentucky? caller: senator mitch mcconnell main one. host: in the house?

caller: i forgot his name. host: i did not mean to put you on the spot. let's go to james in alabama. caller: thank you. i have watched c-span quite a bit. y'all.eciate a i have voted democratic and republican all my life. i will never vote republican again. they do not care about anybody. they care about the rich man. they will not help anybody. all of them is a bunch of crooks. host: a democratic call from south carolina. hello. caller: thank you. they ate nothing but a bunch of spoiled republicans up there. all they're concerned about is having their way. nothing but having

their way. i hope and pray they will all be taken out in next election. if they are non producers. host: the tax cut extension expires december 31 without the 160 american workers. they will see an increase in taxes. tony up next, republican line. caller: i was a very proud republican. i "was" been the key word. i will not ever again vote republican. i am a republican. i am in poverty. they are not helping me. they are not helping democrats. if they are helping no one but

the big people with all the money. john boehner? forget about it. he is being led around like a puppet. thank you for letting me express. i am now a democrat. host: baltimore, independent. caller: good evening. thank you for answering my call. this is an opportunity to look at discussions on the payroll tax. it is that just the payroll tax. it is overall. it is an overall attitude that the congress has there. i think that i am somewhat in the boat with jon huntsman with term limits. i believe that congressmen have term limits because they will come their not being professional politicians. host: let me be devil's

advocate. you have a lot of new freshmen members, particularly tea party members. it is perhaps when the biggest new member house is in history. caller: that is fine. it became they're trying to make a change. the reality is that i do not think that if you look over all for those who have been there that they are doing a whole bunch of horse trading. they did not even care about what is best for the country. when you look at the country, and people want them to do the business of congress and get away from the partisanship. host: independent line. the final vote was 229-193 with seven republicans joining democrats. shortly after, a number of briefings. we want to show you president

obama who showed up at the white house briefing to talk about is his view. >> good afternoon everybody. it is no secret that there has not been an abundance of partisanship in washington this year. what happened on saturday was a big deal. the entire senate including almost all of the republicans voted to prevent 160 million working americans from receiving a tax increase thought could january 1. the entire senate voted to make sure that nearly 2.5 million americans were out there looking for a job. just about everybody, democrats and republicans, are committed to making sure that early next year we find a way to extend the cut and unemployment insurance

through the end of in 2012. even though republicans and democrats in said that are willing to compromise for the good of the country, a faction of republicans in house are refusing to even vote on the senate bill. it is a bill that cuts taxes for 160 million americans. because of their refusal to cooperate, all the americans could face a tax hike in just 11 days. millions of americans are out there looking for work to find their unemployment insurance expired. let us be clear. these bipartisan compromises reached on saturday were the only viable way to prevent a tax hike on january 1. it was the only one. all of the leaders in congress, democrats and republicans, say they're committed to making sure we extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance for

the entire year this is something -- year. this is something i called four years ago. they will work on a one-year deal. they decided they needed more time to reach an agreement. to make your taxes and not go up. -- make sure taxes did not up. what they are really trying to do, what they're holding out for, is to wring concessions from democrats on issues that have nothing to do with the payroll tax cut. issues where the parties fundamentally disagree. a one-year deal is not the issue. we can and we will come to that agreement as long as it is focused on the payroll tax cuts

and unemployment insurance and not focused on extraneous issues. the issue right now is this. the clock is ticking. time is running out. as the house republicans refuse to vote for the senate bill or even allowed to come up for a boat, taxes will go up in 11 days. i thought one of them refer to what they bring doing at "high stakes poker." he is right about the stakes. but this is that poker. this is not a game. this is not politics as usual. right now in recovery is fragile but moving them go right direction. our failure to do this could have affects not just on families but on the economy as a whole. it is not a game for somebody who's out there looking for work right now.

he might lose his house in unemployment insurance does not go through. it is not a game for the millions of americans that will take a hit when the entire economy grows more slowly because these proposals are not extended. i just got back from a ceremony at the air force base where we received apelike in colors that are true spot under in -- received a flag that were in the true colors that they fought under in iraq. when they fight together and sometimes die together, they do not know or care who's a democrat or republican. it is something bigger than themselves. the people in this town need to learn something from them.

we have people who are counting on us to make their lives just a little bit easier to build an economy where hard work pays off in response ability is rewarded. we owe it to them to come to gether and do the right thing. that is what the sentate did. democrats and republicans said we will put our sights on other issues aside and go ahead and do what is right. on something that we all agree to. let's go ahead and do it. we will have time later for the politics. we will have time later to have fights around a whole bunch of other issues.

we know this is good for the economy. we need to put aside issues where there are fundamental disagreement in come together on something we agree on. brinksmanship. the american people are weary of it. they are tired of it. today expect better. calling on the speaker and leadership to bring up the senate bill for a vote and give the american people what the need for this holiday season. thank you. >> president obama earlier today after the house rejected the senate bill by a vote of 229- 193, and they did three things.

they did that. they also called a conference on the senate and they passed a resolution the reaffirms the gop's position on medicare payments to doctors. we have the phone numbers on the screen for you to call. make sure you meet your television when you call in. our plan is to take a bunch more of your phone calls, so you the reaction of speaker john maynard and nancy pelosi and show you some of the floor debate from earlier. kevin is in marshall texas. good evening. caller: good evening. partisanship is on both sides. the president is not have room to point any fingers at anyone

else. i am against it. i am against the extensions. they are saying this is a tax cut. taxes are not cut when you are running a $1 trillion deficit. that is a future tax. let's be clear on that. this is not a tax cut. the democrats are trying to move it more on the upper income and taking it off the poor. the payroll tax is the one tax that the 48% that are not paying any income tax they are paying income tax. this is what they are doing. i am against it. they need to cut the spending. host: thank you for your input. we have a lot of calls.

the democratic line. caller: ronald reagan when he took office, the national debt was $1 billion. he turns the people loose on savings and loans. he wound up having to print up $800 billion in order to save the monetary system. the same thing happen to obama. when he came into office he did not bail out wall street. he bailed out the dollar. if he had not, we would have been at in one of the greatest recessions. it would have been much worse in 30's. i am retired. obama is 1 -- he is as good of the president that president clinton was. i hope the occupied movement, i hope that they get organized enough before november in order to run a bunch of candidates

against these republicans. that he bagger movement -- tea bagger moment with out there and became obstructionists. that is what happened with the tax bill today. i hope president obama don't blink on this. i hope be turned around. i think he is brilliant. host: the house rejected the senate version. reaction from senator john mccain who is in the situation room this evening. here is the reporting of that appearance on cnn tonight. he said it is harming the republican party. the tax code must remain in effect. republicans voted to send the senate bill rather than to the

house floor. we are getting your views. next up is joe on our republican line. caller: thank you for being here. i like the tea party guy is slowing down the process. all the retirees need to realize this. cutting the social security tax. this is the money they paid for social security. they have lost something like $20 billion or $100 billion. when they say this is the payroll tax holiday, the social security payment

holidays. host: you would like to see it ended? caller: it should be called what it is. we have 50% of the people in country that do not pay any taxes at all. the rich, and they are paying. we've got 50's arm of the people who do not pay anything at all. -- 50% of the people who do not pay anything at all. host: let's hear from john. in kentucky, is this across wisconsin? caller: my name is john. i am 72 years old. i am retired. i get sick and tired of listening to these people that the rate cannot pay more. give them more tax breaks.

how can poor people who are losing their medicare and medicaid, it is ridiculous. john boehner is surrounded by a lot of other republican leaders. to cannot to speak to reporters and his use of what is next. -- his views of what is next. >> the president and leaders of both houses of congress have called for a yearlong extension of the payroll tax cut. the house passed a bill that would do just that. it reforms unemployment insurance, protect social security and creates jobs. we are proud of the bill that we

passed. in the house passed with bipartisan support. we understand the senate passed a different bill. we oppose it because of the two month extension. it is unworkable and so complex that many americans may not get the tax threat. we have voted to go to a formal conference to resolve differences between the two bills. this is a system that our founders gave us. it is as old as our nation and as clear as the constitution. our house gop negotiators are ready to work with their counterparts in senate to resolve the differences as quickly as possible. our negotiators are kevin brady, in david camp, tom price, fred

upton, and greg walton. it is up to the president to show real leadership. we can sit down and resolve it as quickly as possible. i sent a letter to the president today asking him to do justice. we have done our work for the american people. now it is up to the president and democrats in senate to do their job as well. i will take some questions. >> [inaudible] >> we have done our job. all we need now is to resolve our differences. a two month extension is nothing more than kicking the can down

the road. the president has asked us to do this for a full year. we did. we offset the cost would resemble offsets. there's no reason we cannot do this. several weeks ago the house had passed a dod authorization bill. they were able to resolve the differences in these two large bills. there is no reason why we cannot do this in short order. >> if senator reid were to say we we get a deal, would you not forge ahead with the conference committee? >> in a lot of ways, resolved. we are doing this under regular order. if there is a difference between the two houses, we sit down and resolve those

differences. >> are members going to go home for the holidays? houle again resolve the? will you keep them here? >> our negotiators are here, ready and able to work. leadership will be here. we will be available to do what needs to be done. the issue now is what will the president a gauge of the democrats and bring them to the table? we will give them a one-year extension of these expire programs. >> the president has said i need john boehner to help out. >> i need it the president to help out. [cheers and applause] >> i have a question. [laughter] he has asked you to help out and take up the senate bill.

any chance of that happening? >> we have already taken up the senate bill. we rejected the senate bill. we moved to go to conference. >> the house passed a one year bill. [inaudible] >> the senate voted to give the american people a $166 tax cut. we voted to give the american people $8,000 tax code. we're going to insist on doing a this-- $1,000 tax cut. we are going to insist on doing this the right way. >> do you feel you can do this between now and new year's? >> we have not been working on

this for weeks. i have told the senate leaders that there will be no negotiations for the house. i meant what i said. somebody passed on to me what they thought it would look like. i made it clear to them that i was uncomfortable with where they were going. i express my displeasure in taking the convenient route. >> john boehner had blocked the senate version of the payroll tax that legislation. we are going to take calls for a

few more minutes and show you some of the house floor debate on the tax-cut legislation. if you want to weigh in on line, you can go to facebook and post your thoughts there. good evening. go ahead. >> it is about 6.2%. they're cutting part of that people have more money to spend. host: it would go back to 6.2% caller: everybody that works pay it. they do not pay federal income tax. cutting that will diminish the funds in social security pull it

the money was really going in and not being spent from other things. i am in favor of letting it go back to 6.2%. if anyone has a household, you do not by name brand stuff when you buy generic stuff, the government needs to do the same thing. cutting the funds is the same problem. most people working today do not need the money. host: you get a weekly paycheck. caller: that is right. most that do not, those are the ones that are hurting. host: he was calling us from new mexico. political is reporting that gary johnson is going to quit the republican primary and seek the libertarian party nomination. the former governor who's

campaigned for the gop nomination never took fire will make the announcement at a press conference in santa fe on december 28. let's go to alabama, independent caller. hello. caller: i was calling. where is the problem with protecting people that are have money? they already has it. why can they pass a deal? host: this at that everybody predicted that everybody that gets a paycheck. -- this affects everybody that gets a paycheck. thank you for turning the conversation. georgia is on our republican line. -- hang on. we will go to our republican line. caller: how were you doing?

host: good. make sure you meet your television set. caller: i am a veteran. i am calling about the people that don't get a paycheck every month. they are solely dependent on social security and medicare. why can they take a page out of clinton's but and take cut on that comment to? they are making the tax cuts. clinton approved that budgeted the deficit. host: the senate extended for

two months. he keeps it up 4.2% as opposed to the previous 6.2%. it continues unemployment benefits averaging $300 weekly. it also prevents a 27% cut in medicare payments to doctors. here is a republican line in georgia. caller: i figured out why in the world democrats disagree on the pipeline that would create thousands of jobs. even more jobs as it gets started to help pay for this tax cut and all the stuff they're talking about. they are pushing back and do not want to. >> they have agreed to over the weekend. they agree to that.

they agreed for a 60 day window in which president obama is to make a decision on the keystone pipeline. caller: all they have to do is agree to it now. if they would not have to worry, i am disabled. if they cut anything else out of my check, i do not know what i'm going to do. host: we appreciate you getting through to us. we still want to show you part of the briefing this afternoon with nancy pelosi. she spoke for about 15 are 20 minutes. we will show you a fine and a portion and then finish up with the phone calls. >> here we are again. we are prepared to stay here

where the american people have a tax cut. people across the nation, democrats, republicans, independents all said one thing to us. they want us to work together. they want is to work together. they support the payroll tax cut. they want to work together to create jobs. they continue the economic growth. it does get that thousand dollar tax cut into the pockets of the american people. it gave us hope that here was an example of how you can work together in bipartisan way, sharing a purpose which was to

get a tax cut. the republicans would not take it anymore. this is too bad. this bipartisanship was so hopeful. they did not take yes for an answer. this give immediate relief and $1,000 in the pockets of americans. the american people responded positively to its.

we had the opportunity. we still have the opportunity to do that. after the senate acted on saturday, we were hopeful that we could take this up and our work would be done. pparently the tea party tail is wagging the elephants. if we do not have the tax cut, if we do not have a payroll tax cut kind january 1, and it will be because of the tea party minority within the republican majority. the tea party minority will be holding up the tax cut. republicans in senate and across the country and in the house support this payroll tax cut.

you see the speaker coming with great confidence in speaking about the process. the american people have the right to ask the question, why a printing process before the tax cuts. the president has said that we all want a one-year tax cut. the senate said they needed more time. in meantime, we can move all out. it to be there for the next few months. there is time to negotiate how we go further into the mix. right now we have to remove all doubt that this tax cut will be for the middle class. we had on the house side read introduced the senate bill.

this is the bill within the first instance of reaching out to colleagues. this is the reintroduce senate bill. there is no procedural process, what ever it is obstacle to pass. the speaker said our work is finished. it is not finished. we have work to do. i called upon the speaker to make sure we are in. i hope we can accomplish it as soon as possible in the next hours or days. regardless of how this goes, we should be here in first week of january. why are we not working the first half of the month of january dajanuary?

host: we will take a few more minutes of your phone calls on the payroll tax that legislation. speaker john boehner air wrote president obama a letter. i want to redo a small piece of it. he said the american people need -- speaker john boehner road president obama a letter. i want to read a small piece of it. a couple more calls. caller: thank you so much for taking my call. john boehner is deceiving the american people when he says that the senate's only once to give americans for $168 in tax breaks. the democrats want to give a thousand a year. if you divide 12 into 1000, that

is $84. $84 times two is 168. the senate passed to work on this for two more months. it would put $168 into the pockets of the american public. >> this is robert on our independent line. >> let's do the math. the millionaires has been getting a tax break for the past 11 years. we keep losing jobs. this is wrong. thank you.

i am a disabled veteran. the senate bill -- we want to take christmas vacations. the millions of unemployed carli are able to celebrate this temporary vote. it is not encouraging them to hire. president obama did not dare take questions because he does not know how to lead. he needs to give his democratic members the leadership that they need to get back in the news conference. host: how long could you been on unemployment? caller: it runs out in january. host: no matter what passes, you are out? caller: it could extend into june. caller: we will get a couple

more calls. i was just wondering if there's anything the president can do to override the house with the emergency powers act and vote for this bill and pass it dax ended the public would get out and vote the tea party out? host: we have to wait and see on that. the house is coming in at 10:00. we will have to wait and see what the next up is. let's get one more call. norma in virginia, independent line. you can get the last word in if you meet your television. -- if you mute your television. host: you are feeding back. thank you for calling in.

eking continue our conversation on line at our facebook -- you can continue our conversation of mine at facebook. we want to show you the house floor debate ahead of the 229- 193 votes, that the house blocking the tax-cut legislation that was passed. this is about one hour and 15 minutes. i would say, mr. speaker, our economy is too weak and the american people have been struggling for far too long for congress not to work out our differences. america is not on vacation nor should the senate be. we have two weeks to find a solution and send something to the president for his signature. that is what house republicans are proposing today. let's look at the differences between the house and the senate. the house extended unemployment for 13 months. the senate bill extended unemployment benefits for only two months. meaning an estimated four million americans could lose the extended unemployment

benefits next year they would get under the house bill. the house reformed the unemployment reform to focus it on getting the people the training and education they need to get back to work, not just handing out checks. the senate did not. the house protected seniors' health care for the next two years by ensuring doctors in the medicare program don't have their reimbursement cut by more than 27%. the senate did this for only two months. the house provided a one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday ensuring a worker earning $50,000 next year has $1,000 more in their pocket. the senate did this for only two months meaning that the same worker would have less than $200 in their pocket or $800 less in take-home pay than under the house-passed bill. the house had a pay freeze for federal workers. the senate did not. the house prevented welfare benefits being used at liquor stores and strip clubs. the senate did not.

the house protected social security by reducing overpayments. the senate did not. the house included a provision that saves taxpayers $9 billion by cracking down on fraud and abuse that is known to exist in the refundable -- in a refundable tax credit program. the senate did not. the house provided for economic growth and job creation in the high-tech industry through spectrum auctions. the senate did not. the house cut taxes to promote business investment and hiring. the senate did not. mr. speaker, while it may sound like there are grave differences between the house and senate bill. it's not a difference over policy. it's simply a difference of the house deciding to act and the senate deciding not to act on so many items. the house bill includes commonsense reforms the american people want, and it adopts a number of the president's legislative initiatives which represent the bipartisan cooperation the american people are demanding. all told, 90% of the house bill is paid for with policies the

president has endorsed in one form or another. so what's really standing in our way? i've heard the president's people say it breaks the agreement over the discretionary caps in the budgetary control act, but look at that talking point. those caps are adjusted only because we are proposing as the president has before to freeze the pay of members of congress and other federal workers. do the president and the senate really want to risk unemployment benefits on middle-class tax cuts and reimbursement to doctors treating seniors and those with disabilities because they don't want to freeze the pay for members of congress and federal workers? mr. speaker, it's not too late. i urge all of my colleagues to support a one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday, one year of unemployment benefits with critical reforms and a two-year extension of reimbursements for medicare doctors. i urge my democrat colleagues to name conference committee members to resolve the differences between the two bills.

conference committees are a jeffersonian concept and we would be wise to follow the models laid out by our founding fathers. if the senate agrees to work together we will help the american people back to work and get those struggling in this economy the help they need, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. levin letchhet me put this -- mr. levin: let me put this very simply. this is a dishonest procedure. this is a reuss to avoid a straight -- radios to avoid a straight up or down -- ruse to avoid a straight up or down

vote on the payroll tax extension. why not do it as called by regular order? that is regular order. because the republican majority is afraid of a straight vote. they are afraid some republicans would vote yes and the senate bill would pass and the president would sign it and it would become law today. and they don't want other republicans on record voting against a payroll tax cut. that is the epitome of a ruse. 39 republican senators, 39, all but a handful voted for the bill before us. but what has happened since saturday's bipartisan senate bill that speaker boehner said was a good deal? well, the -- they staged a

mutiny. and the captain decided to surrender. he decided to join the mutiny to keep the ship from coming to port. but the problem is onboard is millions of passengers waiting to dock. this chart shows the number of passengers. 160 million americans would see their taxes increase. 2.3 million americans onboard looking for work would lose their critical unemployment benefits. and 48 million seniors, americans on medicare will have access to their doctors they know and they trust would have them jeopardized.

so i want to clear, for these people, all of these people, the republican vote today is a vote to nowhere. dick lugar said that. i'm hopeful there are a majority of republicans and democrats today who will proceed because it seems to me it is best for the country as well as all the individuals who are affected. another republican, senator from massachusetts, i quote, house republicans' plan to scuttle -- that's the correct word -- the deal to help middle-class families is irresponsible and wrong. the refusal to compromise now threatens to increase taxes on hardworking americans and stop unemployment benefits for those out of work. we cannot allow rigid partisan

ideology and unwillingness to crow mize stand in the way of working together for the good of the american people. and a third republican senator, senator heller, a former colleague here of nevada, i quote, there's no reason to hold up the short-term extension while a more comprehensive deal is worked out. and i want to quote a letter -- a statement from treasury about the notion that the two-month extension cannot be implemented. and i quote, while any short-term extension is bound to create some administration -- administrative complexities, it is feasible to implement the bipartisan bill. it is feasible to implement the bipartisan senate bill. this is treasury that is in charge of implementation of this. and the treasury department will work with employers to

ensure the smoothest possible implementation. in the current economic situation, any such complications will be outweighed by the economic benefits of ensuring that taxes do not impup on 160 million americans starting on january 1, and i ask unanimous consent that this be placed in the congressional record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: i want to close with what harry reid said. take it seriously. 39 republicans and 50 democrats voted for the bill you won't let us vote on. you will not let us vote on. and i quote, i have always -- i have been trying to forge one for weeks. he could have said for months. and i'm happy to continue

negotiating one once we have made sure middle-class families will not wake up to a tax increase on january 1. so before we reopen negotiations on a year-long extension, the house of representatives must protect middle-class families by passing the overwhelmingly bipartisan compromise that republicans negotiated and was approved by 90% of the senate. end of quote. you will snubbing a bipartisan compromise. you are jeopardizing the lives of millions of taxpayers, millions of the unemployed and millions of seniors. . to keep harmony within your ranks. you are creating the possibility of a -- of immense discord within the united

states of america. we are not going to let you do it. i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the distinguished chairman of the health subcommittee, the gentleman from california, mr. herger. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. herger: mr. speaker, taxpayers, small businesses, and health care providers need certainty and predictibility to plan for the future. unfortunately the bill that's come back to us from the other chamber makes our usual habit of only one year-long extensions look responsible by comparison. the senate bill extends a number of key policies, including the pact preventing a steep cut to doctors' medicare payment for just two months. mr. speaker, we have been down this road before. last year under the previous

majority congress passed five separate extensions of medicare physician payment, mostly for just a month or two. several times the deadline meaning payment cuts tookt effect and had to be reversed. the failure to responsibly address the s.g.r. created an unprecedented amount of chaos and confusion, both for doctors and the medicare agency. house republicans have been determined not to let this happen again. that's why we passed a fully paid for two-year fix. the american people are tired of congress wasting time on political stunts and waiting until the last minute to cobble together half measures. mr. speaker, we still have two

weeks before the end of the year to get this right. and there's no reason to think we'll do better in two months. i urge my colleagues to support the motion to go to conference so we can get a responsible solution. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to a very senior member of our committee, the very distinguished gentleman from new york, mr. rangel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. rangel: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rangel: i am amazed at the ability of the majority to change its position so fast. sometimes i wish democrats had the ability to do this. it wasn't too long ago that there was objection for the taxpayers' holiday because of the impact on social security.

then there as objection to the unemployment insurance because people on the other side said people wouldn't go look for a job. that they would just stay home and watch television and receive the check. and of course no one can deny that the doctors that prepare -- that give care to 48 million people deserve compensation to what they do. but being here as long as i have, i can see how in the majority a handful of people will try to prove that their constituents that they are not marching in line with regular order. they would come down here to go along with their senate or leadership, and it's kind of rough to be a part of a party that is so widely split. i had only hoped that they could come up with a better excuse than the fact that two

months is not enough time to prevent an increase in the taxes of so many, 160 million people, and i know that everyone in this chamber knows that if the american people that will suffer such a painful , insensitive act was to ask what you wanted for two months and then have the congress to extend it? would you take that or would you want it to be for one year and the possibility of getting absolutely nothing? that is such a fearful, such a cruel thing to do to gamble with other people's ability to be able to enjoy this holiday season as best they can. and so i don't think that there will be any winners in what's going on today, but i hope that

the regular republicans would be able to see their way clear. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camep: -- mr. camp: i yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from florida, mr. west. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute. mr. west: thank you, mr. chairman, mr. speaker. last week we voted to have a one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday. last week we voted to a one-year extension of unemployment insurance with reforms. last week we voted to have a two-year suspension of the sustained growth rate for the doctors that provided the care. last year we voted for certainty and voted to restore confidence. we voted for a measure that was paid for, would have no detriment or negative outcomes to social security. last week we voted for job creating policies and a bill that had 10 to 12 obama approved provisions. we are not afraid to vote. and if you don't want to accept this measure, then continue to vote no. just the same as our colleagues from across the aisle last week

voted no. they voted no against what president obama wanted. they voted no against what senator harry reid said he wanted. they voted no against what senator chuck schumer said he wanted. the senate sent us back a two-month extension which is irresponsible and cannot be implemented. and it reflects abject incompetence. i urge all of my house colleagues to vote yes on this motion to disagree with the irresponsible senate amendment and move the conference. or do we just want to continue to see the miracle of people suffer? thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield a minute and a half to the distinguished gentleman from washington, mr. mcdermott. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, a famous speech started that we will little note nor long

remember what we say here today. but the people, the bible says, by your deeds you shall know them. the republicans have said that it's christmastime. kids are hangling their -- hanging their socks all over the world. and they are all getting up and hoping there will be something in that sock on christmas day. and the republicans have something to put in it. they have a lump of coal. they are going to say to 160 million people, we are going to boost your taxes, here your christmas gift, right? we are going to say to 2.5 million unemployed people, no unemployment benefits because it's only for two months and we can't -- there's every excuse in the book you can give, but when they get up on christmas,

there's going to be coal in their sock. the working poor of this country are counting on that tax break. they have gone out and bought gifts for their kids and they think they are going to pay for them because they have this tax reduction. and you are taking it away from them after they spent the money on the christmas gifts. that's your lump of coal to the middle class. now, for the seniors the lump of coal is, we are not going to pay the doctors, we are going to cut the doctors by 25%. and doctors are going to say, i'm going to limit the number of seniors. remember the lump of coal in november of 2012, folks. they gave it to you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: at this time i yield one minute to the distinguished majority leader. the speaker pro tempore: the majority leader is recognized for one minute. mr. cantor: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from michigan.

mr. speaker, tonight's the first night in hanukkah and christmas is fast approaching for families across america. and what do the families see coming out of washington? dysfunction. and half of congress unwilling to do its job. mr. speaker, we were elected to work for the best interest of the american people. and in this tough economy, middle class americans and working families need to know that their taxes won't be going up at any point next year. so far the house has passed a bipartisan year-long plan to ensure that taxes do not go up. the senate on the other hand has passed a two-month plan. according to experts, the two-month plan is simply unworkable. families, employers, and workers can't live their lives month to month. washington needs to stop adding

confusion and more uncertainty to people's lives. i think we can all agree that the two-month concept doesn't make a whole lot of sense. mr. speaker, bottom line, a two-month patch is irresponsible. that's why the house is taking a stand. we believe all americans deserve certainty. we want a year-long extension of the payroll tax cut which will prevent a tax increase on every american with a job. luckily, mr. speaker, everyone claims to agree. in fact, the president himself said, it would be inexcusable not to extend the payroll tax cut for a year. the leader of the senate says that we should be working on extending the payroll tax for a year. but only after the new year. mr. speaker, a great virginian once said, never put off tomorrow what you can do today.

that man was thomas jefferson. so let us dedicate ourself to that spirit. people across our great country are tired of hearing why washington cannot do things. they are seeing say in and day out that washington is not working together. but we have the ability to give them some hope. let's show the american people that there's a reason to believe that we can work together and deliver results. the truth is, we are not far apart on this issue. the negotiators got extremely close. we owe some stability and good tax policy to the hardworking people of this country not more gimmicks and political games. today this house will vote to go to conference and work these differences out in regular order. we need to come together in a responsible manner to find

common ground where we can accomplish everyone's goal of a year-long payroll tax extension. mr. speaker, there is no reason why the house, the senate, and the president cannot spend the next two weeks working to get that done. america will be waiting. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to another distinguished member of our committee, mr. neal, from the great state of massachusetts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. neal: thank you, mr. speaker. if just the speaker house, and majority leader could work together. there was a deal over the week end. the speaker of the house accepted the senate's version of that agreement. only to discover in a conference call that he had to back down. the chairman of the ways and

means committee, my friend, he doesn't believe what they are doing here for one moment. they are courting disaster. this is the season of advent and christmas for christians. hanukkah begins today. it is the quest for light in our lives to enlighten the american people as to what is taking place here today. 160 million americans are going to lose this tax cut. organized labor and management, they do this all the time. you have a cooling off period. you get to a more benign time. and you negotiate in good faith. you have seen what's happened here. a radical element has seized the republican party. the senator from massachusetts, senator brown, is on the front page of the "boston globe" today criticizing his own party. dean heller criticizing his own party. richard lugar criticizing his own party. we are arguing today about unemployment benefits in this

season for members of the american family who are going to lose those benefits. we are arguing about tax cut for middle income americans today, 160 million strong. for doctors who care for the most vulnerable amongst us as the medicare patients. over their reimbursement rates. when you consider what republicans did during the bush years with those tax cuts for wealthy people, they never flinched for one moment. the rich were rich and they weren't going to take it anymore. . and therm going to reinforce that idea, cut taxes 10 times in 10 years for the wealthiest among us, we should be voting on what the senate did. let's have an up or down vote and then explain it to the american people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: mr. speaker, i yield

two minutes to the distinguished chairman of the trade subcommittee, the gentleman from texas, mr. brady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. brady: mr. president, senate democrat leaders, don't vacation until you finish your job. families and small businesses need tax relief for a full year, not just for two months. the house, we've already done our job. we've already passed a full one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday. we've included unemployment reforms for those who are out of work, paying our local doctors fairly in medicare for a full two years, unlocking the keystone pipeline and cutting spending to completely pay for it. we've done our job, but the democrat-led senate shortchanged the american public by rushing through a partial two-month extension and then hurrying home for their christmas vacation. that's irresponsible. families and small businesses need to be able to plan with

confidence for a full year, not just two measly months. president obama said -- you said, mr. president, just last week that the american people deserve a one-year bill. our democratic friends said a one-year bill. the democrats said a one-year bill. well, house republicans are going to hold you to your word by moving forward today to conference committee to work out the differences. we're going to work it out not next year, not when you get around to it but now. that's the next step in the constitutional process and we, house republicans, are willing to work through the holidays to make sure we get the job done for the american public. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to the gentleman from georgia, a very distinguished member of our committee, mr.

lewis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. mr. lewis: mr. speaker, i want to thank my friend and my colleague, mr. levin, for yielding. if we go home without passing a bipartisan senate bill we degrade ourselves and this congress. we are out of time. we cannot impinto this holiday season -- we cannot go into this holiday season without helping our unemployed brothers and sisters. we cannot keep our seniors from seeing their doctors. we cannot allow taxes to go up for millions of americans. what is happening here today is shameful, it is a disgrace. it is unreal. it is unbelievable. we can do better. if we fail today, how will you

face your neighbors, family who are suffering? where is your compassion? where is your heart? where is your soul? i say vote no on this motion and pass the senate bipartisan bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: at this time i yield four minutes to the distinguished conference chairman, the gentleman from texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for four minutes. mr. hensarling: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, we all need to be reminded why we're here in the first place. we're here because the president's economic policies have failed. they failed this nation. ever since he was elected, unemployment has been at, near or above 9%. and the people suffer. i believe almost every member of this body believes that we

must extend the payroll tax holiday. that's not the debate, mr. speaker. what is most curious, though, is our president. our president has said it will be inexcusable for congress not to further extend this middle-class tax cut for the rest of the year. he didn't say 60 days. he said the rest of the year. the democratic leader has said that she intends the fight to extend these provisions for a full year. and so, mr. speaker, i guess i'm confused. i hear my friends on the other side of the aisle say they want to do this for a year. they say they want to do it for a year. they're just not willing to vote to do it for a year. that's most curious, mr. speaker. i don't think i understand it. it's what the president asked for. it's what the american people deserve. they don't want us to punt the ball. they want us to do our job. and so there's no point of

contention on whether or not it should be extended. the question is whether we're going to do it for a full year or punt the ball down the field and once again disappoint the american people. we stand ready to work over the holidays to get this done. that's the question. are you willing to work over the holidays or are you not willing to work over the holidays? the american people, most of them will have to work over the holidays. why shouldn't we be willing to do this? and, you know, mr. speaker, i guess it's curious how many people are unaware of this thing called a conference committee. since the dawn of the republican, these are how things are settled between the house and senate. if you don't remember sisks 101 -- civics 101, you can go and watch "schoolhouse rocks" video. they will appoint conferees and

come negotiate in good faith except the senate democratic leader said he wouldn't do it. the house democratic leader said she wouldn't do it. so it kind of begs the question, mr. speaker. do they want to make laws that benefit the american people at a time of need or do they want to perpetuate a campaign issue that maybe they believe helps their campaigns? that's really the question. and last but not least, mr. speaker, we ought to pass laws that actually work around here. abc news reported last night, quote, holiday passed by senate, pushed by president cannot be implemented properly, experts say. well, isn't that interesting. the national payroll reporting consortium that handles payroll for about a third of the private economy said, quote, this could create substantial problems, confusion and cost affecting a significant percentage of u.s. employers and employees. the associated builders of

contractors, the people who go out and actually build things in america have said, quote, this sort of temporary fix underscores congress' uneven ad hoc approach toward the economy and causes more harm than good for america's job creators. the leading building trade association in the nation said their 60-day plan will cause more harm than good. mr. speaker, house republicans have craft a good and reasonable bill. it's one year that does what the president asked us to do. it does what the american people asks us to do. it's actually paid for. it doesn't increase the deficit, and it blocks tax increases. i don't know how my friends on the other side of the aisle think we will do this without it. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan,

mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: it's now my privilege to yield two minutes to another member of our committee, a distinguished gentleman from california, javier becerra. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. becerra: i thank the gentleman for yielding. my friends, we've seen this movie before. house republicans once again are driving our government and our economy to the edge of the cliff and this time they replaced 160 million workers and millions of seniors in the front seat of that car. they are refusing to allow 435 members of this house to vote on a bipartisan proposal passed by 89 out of 100 senators next door. my republican colleagues know that this bipartisan bill passed by the senate would pass on this floor and it would save working americans from having

their taxes increased during the holidays. the truth is republicans are feuding amongst themselves. house republicans are fighting with senate republicans and quite frankly they're fighting with republicans throughout this country because a majority of them support the president's payroll tax cut. mr. speaker, once again the people, republicans and democrats alike, are way ahead of the politicians. they want us to get our work done and get it done now. let's stop showing the american people b-rated movies on the floor of the house and pass the senate bipartisan legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i yield three minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from louisiana, dr. boustany. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for three minutes. ms. hanabusa: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank -- mr. boustany: thank you, mr. speaker. before coming to congress i was

a cardiovascular surgeon. just like doctors all over this country, we're there 24/7 to deal with problems. now, i remember distinctly one night christmas eve, in fact, i was getting ready to sit down with my family for dinner and an 86-year-old man had a ruptured an rism who went into shock. we saved his life, long story short. we had a duty, an obligation to our patients. by god, to put physicians in a position of seeing a 27%, 28% cut in reimbursement is just untenable. why? it's not because of the positions. it's because of patients who are going to lose access. medicare beneficiaries, seniors, those with disabilities who will lose access to care in a situation where we're already seeing that

eroding access. we have an obligation to act because the consequences are not good. with regard to all these provisions that we're trying to extend. this house passed a bill last week. it was a very responsible bill with good reforms, and it gives two years' stability period for physicians and those patients who desperately need this care. and what did the senate do? what did the senate do? the senate capitulated, the senate caved and the senate basically just gave up with contempt for the american people. that's what it comes down to. they basically are content with allowing confusion and disruption and chaos and uncertainty for patients who deserve good, high-quality care. they did the same thing to those who depend on these unemployment benefits and the same, and the same for those who depend on this payroll tax

cut during this holiday season. we're going to pass a bill today that basically says we're going -- we want to go to conference to resolve these differences and the senate has an obligation to the american people to stand with us and follow its constitutional duty to go to conference to resolve these disputes, these differences in a time-honored way. mr. speaker, the senate has an obligation to the american people. the senate has an obligation to carry out its duty to the american people. we can get this right. let's do it and be done with it, but let's get it done and let's get it done right and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 10 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan -- 10 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has 15 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: thank you. i now yield two minutes to another distinguished member of

our committee, the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for two minutes. mr. blumenauer: i thank the gentleman. some say that the house republican leadership pulled the plug on the senate bipartisan bill because they were afraid of their republican tea party freshmen perhaps. but what is clear is that we're not being allowed by the republican leadership to vote on the senate bill because the republicans are afraid of their moderates, their independents, their reasonable, unhardliners. the measure of this congress is that the house doesn't act until they are forced to as a result of self-imposed, crisis-induced deadlines. and then if they can't get their own way on an agenda that could never be passed through regular order in both chambers and signed by the president,

then they throw a tantrum. and what we are dealing with today is a legislative tantrum. . i don't like the two-month extension. it has some difficulties and uncertainties, but there will be far more uncertainty and difficulty if there were a two-week gap or a two-month gap. where 700,000 people in early january will lose their unemployment benefits. two million in the next two months. if we simply would follow regular order, allow a vote on the senate, we could build on this glimmer of bipartisanship from the other body. allow your members to vote. who knows where it could lead. we actually may be able to solve some of these long-term problems. thank you, i yield back.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i would ask if mr. levin would like to yield again to even up the time. mr. levin: thank you. i now yield two minutes to another distinguished member of our committee, mr. pascrell, of the great state of new jersey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. pascrell: almost good afternoon, mr. speaker. this is not a fraternity house. this is the house of representatives. yet what have we wrought? i heard someone, two people say on this floor, quoted the president of the united states, they should apologize to him immediately, that the president was urging us to vote a one-year plan. he wasn't asking us to vote on your plan for a year. you know what he thinks about what you proposed. and it didn't even come up in the senate. in fact, 39 republicans, that's

82% of the entire delegation of the republican senate, and 89% of the total senate voted for this compromise. i know you hate the word. compromise is -- does not mean you surrender your values or principles. compromise is what was the basis of the forefathers. that's how we got a constitution. nobody was happy with that constitution. they didn't get everything they want and you're not going to get everything you want. so you better get it out of your head right now. through the speaker, through the speaker. the majority leader, wonderful cliches, he forgets that only two years ago a republican member of the house sponsored a two-month payroll tax holiday and had 59 co-sponsors. we have amnesia, selective amnesia. he changed his tune this saturday. he was against the idea of a

short-term gimmick. this saturday he said it's a good deal. it's a victory, he said. he claimed victory. reminds me of another victory i heard a couple years ago. once the same members of this party in this caucus rebell, the speaker reversed his course. keeping the payroll tax cut in place as we figure out a way to extend it for the year, reduces uncertainty among employers and the families in my district, the workers of my district, and i ask that we reconsider what we are doing today. thank you, mr. speaker. have a wonderful day. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair and not other members of the body. the chair will now recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman kansas, ms. jenkins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman kansas is recognized tore two minutes. miss jenkins: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, folks are mad out there.

they are mad because what congress is doing or not doing in many cases makes absolutely no sense. as a c.p.a. i'll tell you that handling tax policy on a month to month basis isn't just irresponsible, it's down right crazy. according to the nonpartisan national payroll reporting consortium, the cost of complying with the two-month extension proposed by the senate may actually harm many small businesses. in fact, implementing the cuts on this short timeline may not even be possible. in addition to being a c.p.a., i'm also a mom. and i do just about anything to be working out of our topeka office this time of year so that i could spend the evening with my kids, but agreeing to a tax policy that is so short lived that it costs not just our government but also our small businesses big bucks is not one of them. the american people are

exhausted. they are sick and tired of congress kicking the can down the road on hard decisions. so i can our leaders in the senate, are your vacation plans more important than good policy? why will it be easier to negotiate a deal in february than it is today? come back. we still have time. work with us to do the job we were elected to do. let's make the hard decisions today. let's extend the payroll tax cut for the entire year and let's not do it on the backs of a generation more focused on santa right now than they are on tax policy. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen, who is ranking on the budget committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for three minutes. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from michigan. the american people should understand very clearly what's going on here right now.

and that is that the republican majority in this house of representatives is refusing, is refusing to allow a vote in this house on the senate bipartisan compromise. they are refusing to even allow a vote on a bill that received 89 of 100 votes in the senate, including 85% of the senate republicans. what are they so afraid of? it's very clear that the republican leadership is afraid that that same bipartisanship that took place in the senate will take place right here in the house. because they don't want a bipartisan bill. otherwise we would have a vote on it. what we are witnessing today, mr. speaker, is the triumph of tea party extremism over the good of the country. the sad part is we probably shouldn't be surprised because it was just a few months ago that the republican leadership was opposed to extending the payroll tax cut at all. they originally said that raising taxes on 160 million

americans would be ok. no problem. i have a long list of statements from republican house leaders to that effect. then two things happened. a whole lot of economists told us what was common sense, that in fact if you raise taxes on 160 million americans, it will hurt the economy. and it also begins to sound a little strange for our republican colleagues to be skellously -- zealously protecting tax breaks for special interests and millionaires while allowing tax increases on 160 million americans. so they changed their story. then it was we couldn't do this because it was going to hurt the social security trust fund. that coming from the party that wanted to privatize social security. and then the social security actuary told us and the country that it wouldn't take one cent from the social security trust fund. so now we have a whole different story today. now the same folks who were opposed to any continuation of the payroll tax cut say they

oppose the bipartisan senate bill because it was only for two months. now they are preventing a vote on that bill. the consequence is going to be very clear. january 1, 160 million americans are going to see their payroll taxes increase. at the end of the day the republican majority here in the house is going to go home, they are going to go home, but you know what will remain here? the senate bipartisan bill because we will never have voted for it. so at any time in the next several weeks we can all come right back here and in a matter of five minutes send that bill to the president's desk which he said he will sign and make sure that we avoid a payroll tax increase on 160 million americans. make sure folks who are unemployed through no fault of their own get unemployment compensation. make sure that doctors will continue to be paid when they treat medicare patients so they can serve those patients. it will be sitting right here for three weeks.

why? because the republican majority won't let us vote on it. i would be happy to yield 30 seconds to my friend, the chairman of the ways and means committee, to tell us why you refuse to a lou--allow a vote on the senate bipartisan bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i would just say that if minority leader pelosi and senator reid appoint conferees, there is no reason for taxes to go up. with that i yield -- mr. van hollen: you didn't answer my question. mr. camp: regular order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is out of order. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman from tennessee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from tennessee is recognized for two minutes. mrs. black: thank you, mr. speaker. fixing something for two months is not fixing something. it's a band-aid and it's bad policy. i have been a nurse for over 40 years and i'm going to use a medical analogy to illustrate this point. if someone were to come into the emergency where i'm working

with an issue, medical issue, and i said to them, i'll give you a choice. we can either fix your problem for two months or we can fix your problem for a year. i have no doubt that the patient would choose certainty of one year over two months. for the past 10 months i have been visiting individuals and businesses in my district and what i continually hear from them is that uncertainty is hurting them and it's hurting our economy. now, the house sent a bill to the senate that contains some certainty. and we get back a two-month band-aid. in this bill we had certainty for businesses. certainty for doctors. certainty for individual taxpayers. and certainty for our seniors. there is a need for a two-year extension on the medicare reimbursement for our doctors to ensure that seniors receive access to care.

there is a need for a one-year payroll holiday for individuals and businesses. as has already been said, the national payroll reporting consortium, a nonpartisan group, have expressed concerns to members of congress that the two-month payroll tax holiday passed by the senate and supported by the president cannot be implemented properly. we also need a two-year extension or fix for our unemployment benefits to give certainty to businesses and also to individuals. mr. speaker, i am frustrated that the senate kicked the can down the road one more time. for only two months after we sent them a bill that was not only bipartisan, yes a bipartisan bill passed by this house, but also had good job policies. i came back to d.c. yesterday to do something better.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to a very distinguished member, the gentlelady from illinois, jan schakowsky. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from illinois is recognized for two minutes. ms. schakowsky: i thank the gentleman for yielding. don't blame congress for not working together. blame the house republicans who can't even work with each other. the one and only reason this house of representatives is not voting for the bipartisan senate bill to provide relief to middle class taxpayers, seniors, and disabled people on medicare and jobless americans is because it would pass. that's right. the republican scam was to bring up the bill supported by 90% of the senate and then kill it. but on the way to this slaughter, a funny thing happened, sensible republicans basically said, you want me to vote to abandon millions of

middle class americans without the help they need this holiday season? no way. so the sanctimonious rhetoric you hear today from the republicans is nothing but talk. baby talk. if they don't get their way exactly, then they won't play. what they are saying to millions of americans saying happy han can to middle class americans -- hanukkah to middle class americans who are lighting the first cannel tonight and won't get their $1,000 tax break. happy new year to our seniors and people with disabilities who may lose their doctor. merry christmas to the jobless americans desperate for work, looking for work, who barely survive on their unemployment checks. the house republicans are the grinches who stole your christmas. and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized.

mr. camp: i yield two minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from new york, mr. reed. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. reed: thank you, mr. speaker. to my colleagues on the other side of the aisle, it's not $1,000 payroll tax reduction just as was quoted by my colleague who just spoke. the senate bill is two months. it's $160. so let's be clear and honest with the american people. what we are talking about here in the house of representatives on our side of the aisle today is that we want to do our work. yes, we want to be with our families for christmas. and we want to be home ringing in the new year with our family and friends, but you know what? the american people deserve better. we are willing to stay here and do the work. not do band-aid type of policy. tax policy on a two-month basis? are you kidding me? that is ridiculous.

we need long-term solutions to our problems in america. we need to put the political bickering aside. two months is not a solution. it's dodging responsibility in the senate. . we stand and rise to support today. and it is a vote. we will have a vote to reject the senate position with this amendment and its band-aid policy and we will send a clear message to the american people that we in the house of representatives are about finding solutions long term, one, two years at a minimum and we're willing to do the work and i call on the senate to come back to d.c. and finish the job. hardworking taxpayers of america deserve no less than for all to honor our oath and our responsibility to govern through solutions, not political games. with that i yield back the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: could you verify how much time each side has? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has 7 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has five minutes. mr. levin: i now yield 2 1/2 minutes to the very distinguished colleague from florida, ms. wasserman schultz. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady from florida is recognized for 2 1/2 minutes. ms. wasserman schultz: thank you, mr. speaker. i rise today in firm opposition to this motion to go to conference. without a vote on the senate bill to extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefits. it is deeply disappointing and troubling that we'll be denied the opportunity to vote on the senate's overwhelmingly bipartisan compromise that would bring relief to millions of america's working families. now our republican colleagues have said, pass the one-year bill that passed the house last week. well, talk to your republican colleagues in the senate. four times the senate republicans -- excuse me, four times the senate democrats tried to bring up your bill and four

times a senate republican objected. facts are hard. if we do not pass this bill, 160 million americans will face a $1,000 tax increase as we go into the new year. if we do not act in my home state, nine million floridians will see this tax increase next year. if we do not act, 2.2 million unemployed americans will lose their unemployment benefits. and if we do not act, 48 million seniors will face the specter of having to find new doctors due to cuts for reimbursement rates. i've received countless constituent calls, letters and email, many of them very personal and emotional. just this morning i was especially moved by a note from a single mom, christine, with a 3-year-old daughter from my congressional district. she wrote, i am pleading my case to you out of desperation, to extend unemployment insurance. these benefits help her provide food and necessities for her daughter. too many of my colleagues like to paint unemployment beneficiaries with one insensitive and cruel brush.

this woman isn't sitting around. she was laid off from her job this fall and has only been on unemployment for a couple of months while she looks for another job. my constituent's story, while personal and moving, is unfortunately not a unique one. my republican colleagues who callously ignore the needs of middle class americans by refusing to vote on the payroll tax extension and unemployment benefits are sending the message to millions of working families that despite their efforts to look for and find work in this delicate economy, they simply don't care. the house republican leadership needs to allow a straight up or down d vote on the -- up or down vote on the senate bill that passed 89-10 with strong bipartisan support. clearly they're afraid it might pass. i urge you to listen to the plight of constituents like christine who said, i'm asking that they give people more time to find work by pushing these dates back further. i'm having a very hard time trying to find work that will accommodate my living expenses for might have self and my daughter -- for myself and my daughter. she's only been on unemployment since sebt september.

she needs her help. pass this bill. and stop playing politics with people's lives. thank you, i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i yield a minute and half to the gentleman from louisiana, mr. scalise. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for a minute and a half. mr. scalise: thank you, mr. speaker, and i thank the gentleman from michigan for yielding. what we're talking about here today, mr. speaker, is the difference between passing a tax policy that would only last two months or passing a tax policy that lasts the entire year. you know, during these next week and a half while families are sitting at home doing their budget for next year, they're going to be making their budget for the entire year of 2012, not just for two months. yet what the senate sent over is a plan that would only kick the can down the road and we'd be right back here again having this same debate in two months. and people are sick and tired of this kind of absurd action from congress. you know, if you look at earlyics courses, anybody who takes their -- -- early civics courses, anybody knows that when there's a difference between the

house and senate, then the two sides get together and work out those differences. that's what the legislative process is about. and clearly we have a difference. we think the policy should be for an entire year as even the president has said and the senate sent us over a two-month patch that doesn't even fix the problem. in fact, outside groups like national federation of independents -- independent businesses said this would hurt small businesses. yet what do we get from the other side? minority leader pelosi, mr. speaker, said she will not appoint any house democrat to participate in the negotiations. she just said this last night. so in the spirit of christmas you've got the minority leader saying she's just going to take her toys and go home. that's not the responsible thing to do. let's stay here, let's get the policy right, let's do our work and let's have the senate do their work too for the american people. thank you, mr. speaker, and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back the balance of his time. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to the distinguished gentleman from georgia, mr.

scott, david scott. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. mr. scott: thank you very much, and i appreciate the opportunity to come down and to say a few words on this. ladies and gentlemen, i'm so glad that the people of this country are tuning in to what's happening on the floor of this house of representatives. what we are seeing is a great dysfunction in the republican party and the house of representatives. here's the situation. the american people are hurting. 160 million american people do not need their taxes to go up. there are 2.2 million american people who are without unemployment benefits who will have those unemployment benefits not extended. and there are seniors, 48 million of them, who will not be able to go and visit their doctors. america's hurting and what does the republican party in the house of representatives want to do? they want to hurt them some more by not even allowing a vote on a compromised bill.

that was passed by the senate with 89 votes, 39 of them members of the senate republican party. ladies and gentlemen, what's at stake here is a fail tour to compromise -- failure to compromise. that is the key. when hamilton and jefferson failed to compromise, it was john adams who brought them together. where would this country be if that had not happened? ladies and gentlemen of america, wake up and realize that this is not just the tea party people or republicans or democrats. it's a party of all of us. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. the gentleman from georgia's time has expired. regular order will be had on the house floor. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: i yield a minute to the distinguished gentleman from georgia, mr. kingston. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. mr. kingston: i thank the gentleman. the president of the united states has said it would be inexcusable not to extend the

payroll tax cut for one year. ms. pelosi, mr. hoyer have said the same thing, as have dozens of other leading democrats. i agree with them and so does a bipartisan majority of the house who last week voted to extend the tax cut for one year. now, why do we support it for one year? because two months only gives uncertainty to this fragile economy. uncertainty, families can't plan, businesses can't plan and jobs can't be created. so why do the democrats want the two months? sadly, because like they're democrat colleagues in the senate, they want to go home. but you know what? there's a 200-year-old mechanism for ironing out senate and house agreements. it's called a conference committee. now, your leader has decided not to point -- appoint this committee. you want to compromise, that's

what this vote is all about. we want to compromise. we know we can't get everything we want. but unlike the senate we're not saying it's our way or the highway. we're saying compromise. vote yes on this vote and let's compromise and let's get this done. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to the gentleman from massachusetts, mr. harky -- mr. marky. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts is recognized for one minute. mr. markey: mr. speaker, tax cuts delayed are tax cuts denied. last year just before the holidays, the house republicans extended the bush tax cuts for millionaires and billionaires, no strings attached. and this year republicans won't even allow a vote to extend middle class tax cuts. republicans want to procrastinate, democrats want to legislate. when it comes to millionaires, the republicans are santa claus. for the middle class, they're the griverage.

this isn't -- grinch. this isn't mission impossible, mr. speaker. we don't need tomorrow cruise to save seniors, the middle class -- tom cruise to save seniors, the middle class and the unemployment. we just need to pass the senate compromise right now. but not allowing -- by not allowing an up or down vote on this compromise, the republicans are raising a curtain on their real priorities. millionaires and billionaires. americans don't need any more meetsings or debate, they just need us to make sure their taxes do not go up on new year's day. today we can protect the middle class. the seniors and the unemployment by passing this bipartisan compromise right now. do it now. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i yield one minute to the distinguished chairman of the select revenue committee, the gentleman from ohio, mr. tiberi. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from ohio is recognized for one minute. mr. tiberi: mr. speaker, this debate is in many ways surreal.

i lived in civic -- civics 101 that the house is a co-equal branch to the senate. members of the other side say, well, this is a compromise. it's a compromise in the senate. not the house. the house has spoken. the senate says, my way or the highway. now, i understand that that's how it's kind of become around here and i know there are friends on the other side of the aisle who are upset with the senate when they've done it on other bills, when they were in the majority. this is enough. the american people deserve better. we need to get back to regular order. we need to compromise between the house-passed bill and the senate-passed bill. that's the way the founding fathers wanted it. compromise between the house, the senate, not between the senate and the senate. for two months, for the american people. that's outrageous. they deserve a year. a full year to have a payroll tax holiday. not two months. come on, ladies and gentlemen. let's send the senate a message.

come back to washington, do your work, give the american people a year, not two months. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: how much time is there left, please? the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has three minutes. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 1 1/2 minutes. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin. mr. levin: mr. camp, are you going to close? i yield myself the balance of our time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: you know, i remember when i was doing arguments before a court and a judge would ask me a very salient question that would get to the heart of the matter. and that's where we are today. there's this question to the republican majority. if you're so sure of your arguments, why not allow a vote

on the senate bill? otherwise everything you've said is a smoke screen. it's because you're afraid you'd lose it. or you don't want some people voting no on the record. that's really what this is about . and there's a second question. if you believe in bipartisanship , why not allow a vote on a bipartisan bill in the senate? i quoted three senators and three more now have spoken out, senators snow, wicker and grassley. senator grassley says, if it doesn't pass the house today there's a chance the payroll tax holiday will be lost. and senator wicker says, i'm surprised the house isn't

willing to take a two-month time-out to do something more lasting. so, i think the answer is, again, you're talking about bipartisanship -- your talk about bipartisanship is totally shallow. the previous speaker said, the senate said it's my way or the highway. no, that isn't accurate. the speaker of the house said to the senate, get on the road and pass a bill and never said, don't do it. he said, do it. , no the problem is that many people -- no, the problem is that many people in the house didn't want to extend the payroll tax in the first place. and you sent over a bill that deleted 40 weeks of unemployment insurance for the millions who are looking for work and can't find a job.

so, today we have no choice. but to vote no and insist that this obligation be met in this house of representatives, vote, vote, vote on the bill that the senate passed. . and your denial of allowing us a vote is a denial to the people of this country who are uninsured as of december 1 for unemployment. who need medicare care, and also those who need the continuation of the payroll tax cut. that's what all of this is about. and anything else is a pure smokescreen that all the american people will see through. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: mr. speaker, i yield myself the balance of the time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. camp: what we are voting on today is to disagree with what the senate did to our bill. we are voting to disagree to the senate amendment. once that's adopted, the house message on this bill goes back to the senate and the senate then has -- is the only body in possession of the bill and we cannot move forward to resolve the differences between the house and the senate until speaker -- until leader reid and representative pelosi appoint conferees. so we are voting to disagree with the senate. let me just say two months isn't long enough. you have heard a lot of people talk today in this debate. it's embarrassing that we are doing tax policy for two months, but it's not just house republicans who think we need a longer term extension, it's supporters including many of our nation's democratic governors. i received a letter that i ask unanimous consent to put into the record, actually went to our leaders, last week for 16

of the nation's governors, democratic governors after we approved 3630, they called for a swift passage of a one-year extension. not two months. one year. that's what the house bill does. what's more that's what the senate bill specifically rejects. i urge that we vote to disagree with the senate amendments and let's get on to a conference. let's resolve this this year so we can make certainty in our code, certainty for all of those people who are out of work, and certainty for those seniors who are -- who need to [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> the house went on to disapprove the senate measure by a vote of 229-193. in a few moments come on "the contenders" the life and career of james blaine. more of our coverage of the u.s. rejection of a senate bill

extending the payroll tax cut and unemployment benefit. you will hear reaction from president obama, house speaker boehner, and house speaker nancy pelosi. >> a couple of live event to tell you about. the carnegie endowment for international peace hosts a for a -- form on the global economic outlook. at two o'clock p.m., newt gingrich will be endorsed by the new hampshire speaker of the house. >> this weekend, three days of american history to be on c-span 3. at 8:00, from lectures in history, the university of colorado professor of american prosperity in the 1950's and 1960's. meet the white house chefs dating back to the carter administration. at 8:00 p.m., pilots of the

seventh anniversary of the japanese attack on pearl harbor. at 7:30, the history of the military service. experience american history tv on c-span 3. >> with the new hampshire primary next month, we are looking back at 14 men who ran for president and lost that had a his political career was markd by scandal and corruption. this is one hour and a half. ♪

>> you are looking at some of the images from the 1884 presidential election and listening to a campaign song in support of the republican candidate, james g. blaine and his running mate, john logan. we are live from the blaine house, the home of james g. blaine and the official residence of the maine governor. we are here with the sitting governor. this house is filled with blaine memorabilia. do you have a sense of the man while you are here? >> absolutely. welcome to maine. welcome to the house. mr. blaine is here every day and we hear his spirit every evening. we always say goodnight to him.

>> the house was built many years ago. and what have you come to learn about the man by living in his house? >> he not only was a very strong supporter and founder of the republican party in maine, but also a national leader and he started maine on its course to where we are now. he was very influential in the state government and federal government. he was a powerhouse. a big-time powerhouse on a national scale. i am very honored to stay here and be a steward of the house. >> you probably have the best commute in america because this is right across the street from the capitol building. >> that's correct. i have been asking for a tunnel under the road.

>> there's maybe better air- conditioning. we are pleased to be here tonight to learn more about james g. blaine. for many people, he has faded into the pages of history but tonight we will learn about the republican members of the state and your state. thank you for having us. >> welcome to the state of maine and to the people's house. >> we will be live for the next hour and half and learning more about james g. blaine's america and the republican party. he was so influential bringing to the state. two guests are waiting for me in the reception room and they will be my guests throughout the program. while we are getting set up in there, i will show you a clip from a roundtable discussion that we hosted. they discuss james g. blaine and his time. we will see you in a minute or so. >> 1884 against cleveland. ironically, in 1876, it was blaine who prevented ulysses grant from making a comeback and winning a third term.

>> besides being secretary of state for james garfield and chester arthur -- >> he was secretary of state under three presidents. >> what else did he do? was he elected to other office? >> he was a speaker of the house. he was a governor. he was an iron-willed speaker. >> he changed some of the rules in the house. the speakers are always changing the rules somewhat to their advantage. a very capable guy. >> this was after the civil war when congress was much more central, much more potent than it had been. their reaction against the strong executive sets in. to be the the speaker of the house, to be a power in congress meant a lot more than it would today.

>> do you have anything to say? >> what do you think would have happened if he won? >> put it this way -- i think he would be regarded as the best president between lincoln and tr. >> why? >> he was assertive, he had intellectual capacity. he had a lot of talent. i think that once he had actually achieved it -- people are consumed. people lust after the presidency. this is a distorted malignancy that they suffer from. if they survive it and they win the office. i think that blaine is someone like clay. they have a great deal in common. i think blaine what had distinguished himself. >> as promised, we are in the reception room.

let me introduce you to our guests. we're joined by earl shettleworth, the state historian and the chair of the history department at colby college. and elizabeth leonard is a professor of history. let me have you set the stage for us, the mid 1880's in america. we are 20 years past the civil war. what was the country like going into this election in which he was a contender? >> we are a long way past the civil war in many ways and it is indicated by the fact that there will be a democratic president that is elected that year and that would have been unthinkable just a short time before that. that is one thing. >> because the republicans were the winners of the war and they

had controlled the government for a long time. it feels like a handoff to the south to let the democrats come into the white house. >> talk to me about north and south america -- the parts of the country, excuse me, and the difference in the economies. >> the civil war crushed the economy in the south, so one of the goals of reconstruction was to get the south up and running again but this is on the northern terms. >> james g. blaine was a powerhouse by 1884. maine had not been in the union all that long. >> maine had been originally part of massachusetts since the colonial times and became a state in 1820. we went into the union as a 23rd state. we were part of the missouri

compromise. missouri was slave, maine was free. by the post-civil war, maine had initially suffered a bit of a setback during the civil war which sent about 70,000 men to the war. 10,000 had been lost. our population in the decade of the 1860's did not grow. by 1884, maine was getting back on its feet. maine has always had a wonderful resource-based industries and so we had ice, granite, lumber, we also had textiles, shoes. blaine was a part and a beneficiary of this very robust economy at the time. >> he contended against democrat grover cleveland who won. the republican party that nominated him, this was his third try for the white house, he was unsuccessful the two times earlier. what was the key to getting the nomination in 1884? >> persistence is part of this.

he continued to try and he was recognized as a leading figure in the republican party, there is no question. one of his many nicknames was mr. republican and he was certainly a leading figure. >> he had some great enemies at the time who tried to deny him the nomination. explain this split in the republican party. >> there was a group of moderates called the mugwumps. they were the intelligensia from boston, philadelphia, new york. they were folks that believed that blaine was a very corrupt individual. you think of henry adams who wrote "democracy." a dark figure in the book is modeled upon blaine. he did have very strong enemies even within his party. >> ultimately, this is a very

close election. will you tell me about the result? >> he loses by 30 or 40 votes. >> the actual vote, he loses by 25,000 votes nationally. the key to the loss is the loss of new york state. about 1000 votes. >> new york state was the place where theodore roosevelt was beginning to make his presence known. was he an influence? >> no, he was considered a mugwump, one of the liberals. that is a trend that began his career in that direction at least into the 1890's. >> what is interesting about the 1884 election is that it was highly personal. >> highly personal, in a way we do not think 19th century politics were. we usually don't think that they

were but they were very personal, especially starting with andrew jackson. this is really a fight about blaine as a corrupt politician and cleveland had a child out of wedlock somewhere in the country. they are slinging nasty mud at each other. >> there are two phrases that most high school students study in their high school books that are from this campaign, the first is rum, romanism, and rebellion. where did this come from? >> that was a minister and about a week before the election, he gave a talk that blaine was party to in which he denounced the democratic party as the party of rum, romanism, and rebellion. rum, prohibition. romanism, the roman catholic church.

and rebellion, the south. this is one of the phrases that was carried by telegraph across the country, and apparently contributed to blaine's loss. >> he did not denounce it. many people thought that he had said it. >> it is just that he did not denounce it. >> also the new york catholic vote. >> was there an anti-catholic mood in the country in some sectors? >> certainly, even still. there had been from the 1840's when the irish were emigrating in large numbers. also the prohibitionists and the temperance movement. >> the second phrase is -- you alluded to this on grover cleveland's side. ma, ma, where's my pa? he's gone to the white house, ha, ha, ha. what was that all about? >> that is about this accusation that cleveland had a child out of wedlock somewhere and in fact that he was not the moral

upstanding man that could be set to challenge the corrupt and devious blaine. >> he chose a tactic which i read which was not to deny. >> also to pay child support, pay for the child at the orphanage. >> a lesson perhaps for modern politicians. [laughter] >> i have a book here. the newspapers were reporting on him at the time. this is the book that james g. blaine wrote which helped to set the stage for his campaign. this was very well received. >> the first volume he began to write it in 1881. shortly after he was secretary of state for the first time. the first volume was published in 1884, maybe just in time for the campaign. the second volume did not appear until 1886. however, it was a highly popular two-volume best seller. it apparently sold tens of

thousands of copies. it was his personal account of his experiences in washington from the time of the civil war to the early 1880's. >> he made a lot of money from this. >> he did indeed. >> was he able to buy his house? >> yes, i think it contributed to it. not this house. this goes back much earlier. in 1862, which is a critical year for him, he is speaker of the maine house of representatives and at the same time he is running for congress for the first time. it is in 1862 that he buys this house for $5,000 and he and his wife moved in with their family. this house had been built just a few years before in the 1830's by a retired sea captain. this became his great political center for the rest of his life. >> he hosted many dignitaries here. he had lots of meetings.

>> what you bear in mind that in 1859, he becomes the chair of the republican party in maine and this is a post that he holds until he becomes secretary of state. in the 20 years or so, this house is election central for the republican party in maine as well as a springboard for his national campaign. >> people could see that the state's capital is right outside of the window. >> the parking lot is across the street from the state capital. >> this is a strategic decision to acquire this house. >> ulysses grant stayed here. >> he did stay here for a couple of days. >> we are going to invite you in a little bit on the conversation. in our series, we are looking at 14 men -- and they are men, given the presidential election process in this country -- who were candidates for president in their time and did not succeed in their bid for the white

house. they still had an outside influence on american history. james g. blaine was someone who was known internationally. we will spend some time tonight digging into what made him so well known and why he ended up failing in his bid for the white house. our phone lines will be open and we will take phone calls at about 20 minutes past the hour and we welcome your comments and questions about the gilded age in america and the burgeoning republican party. i mentioned that we are going to be talking about some of his other campaigns and i wanted to start and go back to 1876 which is the first time he ran for the white house. he was nominated at that time. do you know about robert ingersoll and the speech? >> this is a defense of blaine

against accusations of corruption in connection with the railroad industry. that is how ingersoll wanted to introduce him. not everyone believed that he was as corrupt as some people think that he did. >> why did the phrase stick? does it say something about james g. blaine? >> he seems to have been the kind of person who had great admirers and tremendous enemies and detractors. his admirers thought he was a great hero. >> it was a label that stuck because in the cartoons of the day, the plumed knight was a wonderful image. there was a lot of interest in romantic literature. he was shown in the elizabethan costume or a knight in shining armor. this was a perfect kind of image of him.

>> how important were political cartoons in affecting the electorate? >> they were tremendously important. this was a time in which a victorian publications were founded in america for the first time. they were very widespread. they were easily produced. in the case of the political journals, you have "the judge" which was pro-republican and another who was pro-democratic. the one that comes from "the judge," which shows blaine as the elder statesmen in his elizabethan costume. all around him are letters from states all over the country begging him to become president. this is the definitely a pro- blaine campaign cartoon. >> tell us about the stalwarts and half-breeds in 1884.

>> the half-breeds were those that did not support ulysses grant and the stalwarts were those who did. >> what faction was he a part of? >> the half breeds. >> what happened in the convention that he did not get the nomination? >> shortly before, the mulligan letters were revealed which created a big scandal for him. they involved some very questionable stock deals involving the railroads. that clouded the picture for him in 1876. blaine recognized this was happening at the convention. he actually was -- i am sorry. in 1i76, it went to hayes. 1880 was garfield. >> he ran again in 1880. were the half breeds and the

stalwarts active in the party by then? >> i am not sure that they had those terms anymore. there was still divisions within the party. that year, james garfield did get the nomination thanks to blaine in many ways. >> blaine wanted that nomination himself that it came after many, many ballots. when he understood that it was not going to happen, he threw his votes to garfield. >> what happened to him after that? >> he became secretary of state. >> garfield was struck by an assassin's bullet. blaine was actually with him in the train station. >> yes, he was. >> do you know the story? >> they were walking arm in arm. they were very good friends. i read somewhere that garfield never quite trusted his good friend, james g. blaine. they were very good friends.

they were on their way to give some speeches. >> we will spend a little bit more time before we get some calls about these characters. we have heard about the suggestions of corruption. if he were to walk into this room today, what would he look like, what did he sound like? what are some of the things that you know from your studies of the man? >> he was considered very handsome, very well-dressed, extremely well spoken. beginning in the late 1850's, he started out his career here in augusta as a newspaper editor. as a political bug. by the late 1850's, he had very much emerged in the coming political party. he had lots of experience in stump speaking. that really gave him a lot of practice towards being able to articulate his ideas as he

emerged as a national figure. charismatic, magnetism was another word attached to him. >> my understanding is that he had a terrific memory for people's names so he was the kind of politician who could make you feel like he knew who you are and what your concerns were and so on. that made him a very powerful figure. >> there is a story told when he is in the 1884 campaign, he is on a train and he recognized a man who he had met as a wounded soldier in a military hospital 20 years before. that was the kind of memory he had for faces. >> what a gift for a politician, to be able to memorize names and recall them. he was able to capitalize on them. >> he was a great politician. [laughter] >> not just in that, in his

mastery of political tactics. >> mastery of tactics, mastery of leading his party. there is this sense of when he was in congress during those years that he wrote about, which were critical year for the nation, he had a way to smooth over the differences between the sections. and as congress was coming back together, also to include the south. >> some of the references that i read about him -- more mercurial, a hypochondriac, prone to depression. >> he was constantly complaining about his health. he ultimately died at 62 in 1893. in the last few months of his life, he was truly ill. >> he was also relentlessly ambitious and i know that i read somewhere that said that there was no one who yearned or hungered for the presidency

more than james g. blaine. >> throughout his years, the charges of corruption from his days of promoting the railroad, lobby for congress stuck with him. we have another one of these political cartoons. the tattooed james g. blaine. this refers to the charges against him. will you tell us about this episode? >> this is from the election in 1884. this is a tremendously powerful image in that election in that it is recognized as one of the factors that helped to defeat blaine. blaine is shown as a roman senator in the senate and his toga is being lifted from his body. underneath are tattooed his various political sins. the senators are looking aghast at his political misdeeds being

revealed. in the midst of that crowd is his running mate and also a young teddy roosevelt. >> and the letters that were his defense. was it a successful defense? does history record whether or not he was corrupt? >> the mulligan letters were the accusation as opposed to being his defense and he tried very hard to make them seem as though they had no value. i read something about him slamming them down on the desk and daring people to read them -- once he had stolen them from whoever had them. he went to the hotel and then he disappeared with them and he never returned them. he tried to use them as a way to protect himself. i don't think that there's any clarity that he was not guilty. i think it is pretty clear that he was. some called him jay gould's

handyman or busboy or something to that effect, that he was so tight with the railroad industry. it was unlikely that he was innocent. >> they continue to dog him. in the 1884 campaign, someone published what was believed to be a version of the mulligan letters in a pamphlet. he never quite resolved that. >> we will involve some of our viewers in the discussion. our first caller is from atlanta. roger, you are on the air. caller: hello, how are you tonight? >> great, thank you. caller: i just finished reading the biography of speaker reed. for two people who are powerful in the republican party, they seem in the same place. they seem really distant. is that true? is that just a feature of the biography? >> no, i think you are correct. you are mentioning thomas reed

who was born in portland, maine in 1839, just a little bit younger than blaine. he spent his entire public life as a congressman. he rose to be speaker, like blaine was also speaker. reed served in the late 1880's and into the 1890's. the corruption was never a question in relation to reed. reed was a totally honest and forthright individual. in addition to that, reed is described as a towering figure in the history of the development of the congress. he is considered to be one of the three or four of the most influential speakers of the house in the history of the house. his rules, his reform of the house.

the recognition that the majority rule had to be counted and had to be taken into account. >> our next caller is watching us in san francisco. caller: i think you are right on the major issues here. it seems to me that the country was going through a major transition from the old money having formalized their ethical values and then their transition with the railroads into big industrial corporations and raising money for corporations. very different sets of values. the question is, how could someone who was busy making all of the deals and representing wall street maintain any kind of

reputation in this situation? >> one answer to that would be that there was a great recognition of his sheer power. because he was so powerful and to do so much for the party and for the other goals, people could set aside his apparent relationship with the railroads and the industry. >> next is a call from portland, new york. hi, sharon. caller: i would like to thank c- span for bringing this wonderful series. did mr. blaine making money before he went into politics or did he have money to begin with? did he come from a family that had money to begin with? >> he is from a modest background. he was born in pennsylvania. he started out as a teacher. then he married harriet stanwood. there was some question about the validity of the marriage, so they were remarried again in 1851. by 1853, they're getting word from her relatives that there was a business opportunity for

him to come back. they relocated to augusta in 1854. he was involved in a daily paper. he was also involved in the "portland advertiser." and that is the oldest continuous daily newspaper. >> we're looking at his desk from the time period. the newspapers at the time, he was a newspaperman and very involved in politics. was that common? >> i think it was one of the primary ways that politicians got the word out about their policies. certainly there was no television. people were interested. there was no radio, no newspapers and public speaking was a way that politicians operated. >> newspapers were very partisan in those days, and self admittedly so. individual group would start a newspaper and not only to report the daily news of their community, but also to support a political view or a particular political party.

>> was his interest in their -- how did the newspapers and the republican party intersect? >> in 1884, when he becomes the editor of the "quinnepec journal," he is involved in the founding of the "national journal." the newspaper is very much alive with the rise of the party in maine. callt's take a telephone from washington, d.c. >> i find this very fascinating. how would america be different

or how would our country be different if mr. blaine had become president? and then also, why do we not care about him in the history books? could you elaborate on that? >> how would it be different? >> i am not sure the country would be terribly different. i think perhaps mckinley becomes a very pro-business president in 1896. and a republican. and blaine would have brought

about that earlier in 1884. >> some scholars have said that blaine, because of his personal magnetism, would had been a great leader for the country and would have rejected the kind of image of confidence and of power that really had been lacking in recent presidents in that period. in the modern men, the most important figure between lincoln and teddy roosevelt. >> chicago is up next. dave, you are up next. >> there was a comment about referring to him as 20 years on the make.

[laughter] >> well, there is that. >> the railroad connection had some validity in the day. the small town in west virginia, blaine, west virginia, a railroad town. he endures in the railroad that way. did he not lose new york because he did not repudiate the statement of the reverend that people would not support the democrats? thank you for taking my call. >> thank you for watching me. 20 years on the make? that is a great title. >> a great cartoonist, harper's weekly was his forum.

every week he created another challenging political cartoon. he down right dislikes blaine and excoriated him in his cartoons. >> in one campaign, he went out to dinner in new york, incredibly all a bunch of millionaires, all the top millionaires in the york, despite the fact that new york and the country is in a great depression and suffering greatly. he seemed to be completely blind to the inappropriateness. >> that was the very day that he also was witness to the speech. so the morning he did the speech, and in the evening he did delmonico's restaurant. the most fabulous restaurant in new york. that was immediately reported to the press. >> the belshazzar feast.

>> we are in his study. the period of time of reconstruction, where was he on the issues? >> my sense is that he was largely a moderate, which would help to make him and the nation. he was in the congress at one of the more difficult times of its history. but he was also an early advocate of suffrage. that would not have been considered a moderate position. my sense is that that was more opportunistic than anything else. he was among those who believed that black suffrage was important, not because it was important for blacks, but because they would vote

republican and vote for him. >> talking about his enemies, talk about roscoe conkling. >> a congressman from new york. >> i know that there was the struggle between the two of them which led to an historic fight on the floor of the house of representatives. we have a clue about it from the senate historian. >> the two leading republican politicians were roscoe conkling and james g. blaine. they were both dynamic and articulate. they were magnetic personalities. that attracted a lot of people to them. they could give a speech to a convention and knock the

convention out of its mind, they were so terrific. any kind of oratory, they were legislative geniuses, and they hated each other with an absolute passion. no two political figures have ever hated each other as much as these two. partly because they are about the same age, the same ambition, they knew that one or the other of them would stand in the way of the other getting to the white house. and their rivalry started back when they were in the house of representatives in the 1860's. roscoe conkling was a vain man, very handsome, dressed to the nines. he strutted about in a way that made other members uncomfortable. and he never particularly had a good word for anyone. james g. blaine was not afraid

to take on anybody. they debated in 1866 and he launched into one of the most savage attacks on another member of congress. under the rules today, you really cannot attack another member that way. it was full of sarcasm and allusions to the hyperion curl that roscoe had and to the turkey gobbler strut. it was terrific. it gave tremendous amounts of ammunition to the political cartoonist. from then on, they always made poor old roscoe into a turkey. >> the senate historian don richey.

what you're seeing here in the blaine house in augusta, maine. the house is still very much in use. as we look at the characterization there, you think politicians are colorful today, but turkey gobbler strut! how do these stories get passed along to us? >> the press was very lively in those days. the way in which the information was translated to other newspapers around the country was through the telegraph. stories could be written and then they would be telegraphed to other papers. and then copied in some cases to other papers. >> it was entertainment. much of it was not just about the politicians, but the entertainment value that it had. great writing and clever phrasing.

>> just like a sports team. helen, from new jersey. >> this is a wonderful series. i hope my class is paying attention because there will be tests. [laughter] i have a question about the blaine amendments. he tried to amend the constitution. was there other motivations that went along with it? >> more than 20 states have blaine amendments even though it was not successful on the national level. >> it is 37. >> he proposed an amendment that would prevent religious institutions from using federal

funding. >> if it is still in place today. >> the separation of church and state. >> did it ever have a supreme court challenge? we discuss separation of church and state so often in this country. >> i do not know that it has. >> maybe because there are attempts not from the supreme court side but from individuals who are constantly trying to challenge the separation. >> what motivated him and putting it forward? >> it was 1875 and he may well have already had his eye on the 1876 election and opportunists to quit picking an issue. and i'm not beyond thinking that it was an anti-catholic sentiment. the catholic schools would be most likely to use federal funding. >> he was a congregationalist. >> did he have a catholic

parent? >> yes, his mother. but he says -- he attended the south parish church here in augusta. their beautiful tiffany memorial windows that he and other members and other families in that church bought. >> we have a caller from d.c. you are on the air. >> good evening, susan. >> i can hear you. >> thank you for hosting this series. i have been watching c-span for many years and all the programs have been so great. i wanted to thank you. my question goes to the chinese exclusion act. most of new england republicans were against the chinese exclusion act. they tended to be more liberal. they were not on board with that. but blaine was supporting it with the southern democrats.

why was he not so liberal in terms of civil rights at that time? like other new england republicans? thank you. >> again, it is similar to elizabeth's answer on another issue. this is a man who always had his eye on the presidency and in order to win the presidency, he needed to do it from a nationwide perspective. he recognized in the west and especially in california, chinese immigration was a major issue. he wanted those votes. >> i'm taking away that this is a man that wanted that presidency desperately. he was not illogically driven so much as having his finger to the political wind?

>> that is one way to interpret his political career. when i think about the black suffrage policy and at the same time, the chinese exclusion act, i find it hard to put together. if he was racially progressive, why would he not be racially progress on the other side? that makes me think he was very ambitious and whatever would win elections. >> was blaine so obsessed that he considered himself a failure for not having attained it? >> that is an interesting question. >> i do not think we get that sense. he went through the process three times. 1874, 1880, 1884. he was also -- it was dangled in front of him in 1888 and 1892, even though he was very ill. i think he felt that his great accomplishment was the second

term as secretary of state, and there he was able to play out of a lot of his ideas not only on the national scene but on the international scene as well. i do not think he viewed his career as a failure. >> you're watching our series "the contenders." we will take a short break and tell you more about the series. >> "the contenders" and our look at the life of james g. blaine continues in a moment. we feature profiles of key figures who ran for president and lost but changed political history nevertheless. for more information on our series, go to our website at c- span.org. there you'll find a schedule of the series, biographies of all the candidates, historians'

appraisals, and portions of their speeches when available. that is all at c- span.org/thecontenders. we now return to maine and our discussion of the life of james g. blaine. liveu're looking at our picture of the james g. blaine house, the state capital. it is now the official residence of maine's governor and has been since 1920. we are inside the governor's mansion, a guest of the governor and his family, to learn more about a longtime owner, james g. blaine, unsuccessful presidential aspirant, three times won the nomination, failed to win the presidency, and yet made a mark on this country that we are learning more about tonight. earl shettleworth is maine's state historian and the

direction of the historical preservation center. elizabeth leonard, a specialist in civil war america. we're getting great questions tonight. the numbers are on the screen. we welcome your involvement in this. tell me about maine in this time period. we talked about his coming here as a young man. how difficult would it have been for him to establish himself? >> i think he had a very good connection with his wife's family. they were prominent family here in augusta. that connection for him to become the editor of the "journal" was made by families and friends who wanted his wife back here and also wanted to make that opportunity available to him as well. he came at a perfect time in the 1850's, the decade before

the civil war, maine at the zenith of prosperity. there is a recession in the late 1850's, but generally speaking, maine is really cresting in its economic and political fortunes at that time. >> last week we were at the home of henry clay. were there connections between henry clay and james g. blaine? >> there were in the sense that he had grown up in a house where clay was absolutely idolized. when he was a young man, he spent some time in kentucky and working as a teacher and made the point of seeing clay whenever he could when he was in kentucky. he was a very devout fan. >> one account that at the age of 17, he attended one of clay's major speeches in 1947 and took copious notes. >> our next caller in our discussion from indianapolis, edward.

>> hi, how are you? >> great, thanks. your question? >> what was the role of james g. blaine as secretary of state under william benjamin harrison? >> we're going to spend some time on that later on. >> garfield, arthur, and then harrison. harrison was the long period. garfield was less than nine months. with harrison, it was a wonderful position because he had really reached the zenith of his career. he was viewed as powerful if not more powerful than the president himself. he had this free rein to be able to develop ideas that he had been working on for years in terms of international relations. his particular interest during

the 1889 to 1892 period was central and south america, including the idea of the pan- american union and so on. >> i want to get more involved on that later run. there are a few pieces connected that abraham lincoln. he was obviously a supporter of abraham lincoln. did he know him, that we know of? >> i do not know that he knew him personally. >> he went to congress in 1862. so he would have served in washington from 1863, and lincoln was assassinated on april 14, 1865. there is a very poignant reminder of this connection with lincoln here at the house. there is a little card, literally seven days before lincoln is assassinated, blaine went to lincoln to get permission to visit richmond, virginia, which had just fallen, the capital of the

confederacy. we know that he would have had other opportunities to meet and talk with lincoln. we also know that he was so an admirer of lincoln that when he built the addition to the house in 1872 for the study, he wanted to use the very same wallpaper in his study that lincoln had used in his cabinet room. >> we are showing that wallpaper to people as we speak on the screen. it is a replica? and the permission slip to travel to richmond. which would have been necessary at the time. waterville, maine, glad to have a maine person involved in this discussion. alexander, you on the air. >> what other tactics did he use against cleveland other than claiming he had a child out of wedlock? >> as far as i know, that was his primary personal attack against him. there would have been political

attacks against him as a democrat and a representative of the party that fomented the rebellion. >> how much of a scandal would it have been to have a child of wedlock? >> quite scandalous. >> i would think so, too. >> just to answer that question, there were nuts and bolts issues to the campaign of 1884. one of the strong issues that republicans and democrats differed on in the post-civil war period was the tariffs. how much to tax goods coming and going. and that tariff was a major factor. >> and i believe currency was also getting to be a major factor. >> the civil war had proliferated the use of paper currency. the whole issue of greenback

currency was very much in the 1870's and 1880's. >> and into the 1890's. >> that gives weight to the free silver issue. >> houston is up next. our caller's name is james. hello, james. you are on the air. >> he mentioned the civil war governor. the first republican governor was actually my great, great grandfather, hamilton. additionally, the rift with roscoe conkling might have cost him new york and possibly the presidency. some of his polling of the lion's tail came back to haunt him, i think. >> thank you for your contribution. hannibal hamlin. >> he was born in oxford county. he was quite a bit older than blaine. he was a highly skilled lawyer. he had served as governor of maine briefly and then became a senator.

then in 1860, he is chosen as lincoln's running mate for vice-president and served as the vice-president of the united states from 1861-1865. after the war, he goes back into political life again as a senator. he would have been very much a part of blaine's world in the republican party in maine. hannibal hamlin was a very powerful figure in that period and he would have interacted constantly with blaine. >> and he was someone that stood against chinese exclusion. he was a republican who stood against blaine on that issue. >> you hear people bring up the question of, it is time for a new party. the two-party system is failing us and the like. we saw the evolution of a political party. take a minute or so and explain

about the demise of the whigs and the rise of the republicans. >> the demise of the whigs is very much associated with henry clay. when henry clay died, he was so closely linked to the whig party that it really collapsed. but it was not just about henry clay, but the slavery issue and the anti-immigrant issue. and a number of other issues that led to the development of this political chaos which gave way to the republican party but also the split in the democratic party over the course of the 1850's. >> we would love to introduce you to books. our guest, elizabeth leonard, has just seen the copy of her book. it is her first book on joseph holt. take a minute and tell us about his character. >> he was lincoln's judge advocate general.

a very important figure in lincoln's administration. he was the chief of military justice. after lincoln was assassinated, he was the prosecutor of the lincoln assassin. anyone who was seen the film, "the conspirator," has seen a representation of joseph holt which is more than i could say before that film came out. >> it is going to be available. [clock chiming] it is funny because it is not the top of the hour. the clocks are ringing. you will hear a number of them at the top of the hour as we get into the second half of our program. a phone call from michael in tampa. >> i think your show is wonderful and i appreciate the historical commentary as well as the interviewers' commentary. can we put forward some personal commentary relative to his experience and time as

compared to today's political landscape? >> what do you mean? >> i think he represents something that is dominant in the american populace today, and that is not being representative. i think blaine was very inspiring to hear about. i was curious of some personal input from all three of you relative to that landscape of then versus today. >> we will ask both of our guests to talk about that. >> i am not quite sure what he is looking for. you are asking if i think he is a politician who would be recognizable today, i would think that he might be kind of recognizable in his ability to know the political system, to manipulate the political system. to be a real career politician. he is a certain type. >> could he have competed in

today's -- could a person with his characteristics have been successful in today's political world? >> with his charges of corruption? [laughter] >> what would be different about that? >> good question. i think he had a lot of personal skills that probably would stand him in good stead today. clearly, to be an effective leader, you would need to have a charismatic personality and be able to get your message across well. these are things he did very successfully, and he really understood the behind the scenes working of the political scene from the 1850's right into the 1890's. >> we talked about the media being supportive of the parties of the day. as someone who had persistent charges against him, were there investigations by the media at

the time? >> definitely, they were looking into it, but even so, today we investigate people's corruption all the time and they still proceed with their careers. >> this is josh. >> good evening, great show. i wonder if your guests could comment on mr. blaine's foreign- policy as secretary of state, what his opinions were. did he go abroad? i am specifically interested in south and central america. i was born in cuba and toward the end of the 20th century, the cuban revolution was just starting.

i was wondering if mr. blaine ever went to countries outside of the united states, and what his opinions were on colonialism by spain or other countries, and if he had any feelings about those types of issues? it is a great show, and i will hang up and listen. thank you. >> this question is so timely because it is time for us to spend some time learning about his years as secretary of state. we said earlier that he served three presidents. some historians suggest that we look at his legacy in the area of international affairs. can you speak to his influence and answer the question about whether or not he left the country? >> i'll take the first one first is that is ok? >> yes. >> i don't believe that he went to central or south america. europe, yes. he traveled several times to europe in the time between the time he ran for president and the time that he became secretary of state in the mid- 1880's. he spent quite a bit of time in europe.

some of that time was with a close friend of his, andrew carnegie, in scotland. in terms of his significance as secretary of state and the development of the policies, as we have mentioned before, they were primarily focused on central and south america. this was a very progressive thing to be doing in american foreign policy. those areas had largely been ignored since the days of the monroe doctrine. he was very concerned that britain was having an unusually strong influence on some of the countries, particularly argentina, and many of those countries were fighting among each other. he felt that in order to have a strong and safe america, you also need to have strong and safe neighbors to the south. >> we have another of the political cartoons. it is titled "the old scout." what is it about? >> this is a pro-blaine campaign piece that shows blaine as an old western scout on a horse with an old, tattered hat.

>> look at all the peoples of the world looking at him. >> exactly. this was him as secretary of state. this dates from around 1890. he is actually leading the people of central and south america into a new world. he is giving them leadership, and in many ways this is reflecting his pioneering work in creating what became the pan- american union, the opportunity for people to meet diplomatically in both hemispheres. >> where would he have gotten these ideas from? >> i think it goes back to the monroe doctrine. he was trying to revitalize that older image of hemispheric unity and hemispheric defense. something i find interesting is this notion that he did feel that the monroe doctrine extended as far west as hawaii. he had his eyes on hawaii. even though he was talking about hemisphere integrity, he also had an imperialistic strain to

him. wouldn't you say? >> certainly the whole hawaii episode was at the end of his life. he does not even live long enough to see hawaii annexed. he sets it in place by sending his old friend, john l. stevens from augusta who is involved with him back in the 1850's. he sent him as a special diplomatic emissary to hawaii to basically foment revolution. >> you mentioned that he really had an american-centric view even as he was branching out. >> he would have been supportive of the notion of consolidation of capital. the growth of american wealth and expansion around the world. >> the interesting thing, we had a caller much earlier on who asked about thomas reed and there was a strong difference between blaine and his world view and thomas b. reed, who actually resigned from the house after the spanish war because he was so concerned about the imperialistic direction he perceived america going in. there were differing views in america in the late 19th

century about the direction of the nation as a world power. >> he was serving under president benjamin harrison. how strong a president was he? >> i think he was generally perceived as a weak president, and that blaine was a shadow president. this was reflected in a lot of the popular literature and cartoons. >> i read a similar thing about when he was secretary of state for garfield, that the author was defending garfield as being powerful in that relationship. he was defending it against a long tradition of people saying that it was really blaine running the show. >> this is david. >> this is david. >> hi, david. you are on.

>> i was wanting to know did he have any influence? was there any fingerprint he put on wisconsin's socialist party that would become the progressive political party up until 1900 or 1910? all the way into the 1930's. there is a lot of policies that we still live by. workers' compensation and workers' rights. did he have anything to do with influencing anything or anybody in wisconsin? >> not that i am aware of. >> think we are talking about the next generation of politics. we are talking about the teddy roosevelt as the progressive era from the early 1900's. i think you are talking about, the reforms that extended to

other states as well as ours are post 1900. >> i would think he would be very pro-capitalist. we are talking about workers' rights and so on, he was with the millionaires. he was not meeting with the laborers to see. >> could you give us a brief history of the house that you are in, about how the state of maine was able to acquire that from the blaine donation? also, the death in washington d.c. and his subsequent burial 20 years later back in augusta? >> i'm going to ask you not to talk about the death now because we will show a little bit of the gravesite. but tell us about the house. >> the house was built by a retired sea captain in 1833.

our state house right across the street had just been finished in 1832. this was a strategic location for a home. the house was acquired by blaine and his wife in 1862. he died in 1893, she in 1892. the house was really inherited by their surviving children. but then in the 1910's, the house went to his grandson, walker blaine beale. walker was tragically lost in the last month of world war i in 1918 in france. the house went back to the daughter again. she in turn gave it to the state of maine in 1919 as our governor's mansion. it was restored and remodeled so it could be used as the home

of maine's governors. they are the 21st family to live here since 1920. >> let me introduce you to another gentleman we would like to bring into the discussion. let me show you as we start here a biography he has written. his book is "continental liar from the state of maine." a campaign slogan used against him, of course. he is joining us from inside the governor's mansion. how did you get interested in blaine to write a biography about him? him? >> basically, i had been involved in the house since 1966.

i was assistant to the governor. i knew all about the blaine house. later on, another governor asked me to be the co-chair of a group called friends of the blaine house. i was spending a lot of time here. there was a little bit about him here. there really was not much. there was no up-to-date biography of him. the previous biographies were about 70 years old. there have been two of them written in the 1930's. i thought it was high time that this fascinating character who came within a whisker of being the president of the united states should have another biography. that is how i got involved. >> what are some of the other words you would use to describe blaine? >> could you repeat that? >> what are other words you would use such as fascinating to describe him? >> one they used a lot was magnetic. they called him the magnetic man because he had a magnetic personality. apparently when he would walk into a room, he just filled that room. everybody flocked to him.

he was a natural in that regard. >> and you have been listening to our conversation. do you have a favorite story we had not told tonight? >> i did not hear everything that you said. i was wanting to start by talking about the first time he was secretary of state. i do not know how much you got into his relationship with gafield. >> that is okay. tell us a little about it, please. >> garfield was like a protege of his. he helped him get through a real tough patch in congress when garfield was accused of corruption and taking something he could not have taken. he got in on that. they were very close friends. in 1881 when blaine was running for the second time, he did not have the votes to get the nomination himself. he turned his votes over to garfield. that is how garfield who was a very dark horse when the

convention started happened to end up as the republicanthe sort of quid pro quo was when the number one job of the cabinet was to be secretary of state. it was understood between them that he would become secretary of state. >> let's take another telephone call. we have less than 20 minutes left in our 90 minutes on james g. blaine. ohio, this is chris. >> hi. i was curious about blaine's relation with radical republicans before and during and after the civil war. it might be particularly interesting since he was chair of the senate foreign relations committee.

>> thank you very much. is that something you can take? >> i can take a shot, particularly at thaddeus stevens. blaine made a name for himself by taking on the dow the thaddeus stevens, who everybody was afraid of. everybody was afraid of. i do not know exactly what his relationship with sumner was, but he was not a radical republican. he was a moderate in that regard. he still wanted to build the republican party in the south. that is why he was so strongly for suffrage for the free slaves. and for that part every construction.

he was not for tremendous punishment for the south that some of the radicals were. >> we are talking about the life and times of james g. blaine, unsuccessful nominee for president in the '84 election. grover cleveland was the successful candidate. candidate. we believe he had an influence on american history and are learning more about that tonight. woodland hills, california, you are on the air. hello, eric. >> hello, how are you? continuing on about james blaine's personality, i was wondering, he is certainly a larger-than-life character. do you see him embodied in any current politician? >> let me give them a little time to think about it. >> i do not think so. he was considered a very congenial person. he came from away, as we say here in maine.

he came up here as a young man. immediately he was accepted by people here. he was so good with people. he was sort of a combination of various people that we have now. i do not see anybody that has his intellectual depth. he was a very bright guy. he was very well read. i just read about him going to parties in washington and being described as being surrounded by women there because he was reading them poetry. >> have either of you read about comparisons to today? >> i thought about bill clinton. >> in some ways, that kind of great personal style, larger than life -- very commanding -- my understanding of bill clinton is when he walks into a room, he takes center stage without trying. >> and a great orator, too.

>> and very bright. clearly a very intellectual figure. the other person i thought of was lyndon johnson in terms of him being a party man and knowing everybody and being able to gather people together to do what he wanted. >> and to work the system. >> but a little corruption here and there. >> we are live inside the governor's mansion. we have 15 more minutes. falls church, virginia. sean, you are on. >> good evening. i was wondering. was there a residence on dupont circle? is there any connection between mr. blaine and the southern railroad? >> we will take it in here.

>> what was that? >> we will take in his residence in washington, d.c.? >> in 1881, when blaine became secretary of state, he decided to build a large mansion on dupont circle. that house is still standing today. it was a house that he only kept for a few years. in the post-1884 election, he and his wife traveled a lot. it was at that same time after giving up the washington residence that they built another big gilded age victorian summer cottage here in maine. then when he became secretary of state for the last time, he actually acquired the secretary of state's house near the white house. near lafayette square. that is the house he died in in 1893. >> he had sold the dupont circle house. >> he was there for a very short time. he had one of his daughters who was married there.

his wife hated the place. it is absolutely mammoth. it is still standing on massachusetts avenue. >> interested in james blaine and like to see that period of history. about 12 minutes left. hi, stanley. >> are there any books that they might recommend for reading in regards to mr. blaine? >> i would suggest the book you are holding right there. if you want to know about the time period or the state in addition to this, some other books you can recommend? >> i would agree. neil's book is the most recent and up-to-date and comprehensive of blaine. you have to go back to the 1930's to have two biographies for him.

neil is also an author of other books. he has done an overview of the state of maine. >> he is getting a lot of valentines in this room. >> good. [laughter] keep it up. >> we are talking about houses. in this book, you described the scene when blaine learns he is successful in obtaining the republican nomination in 1884 and he goes to the front door of this house to greet his supporters. will you tell us about that time? >> when the news first came, the people were gathered down on water street which is right down by the river. around the post office, his biggest crony was the postmaster down there.

they were putting up signs about how blaine was doing. they put up that he had gotten the nomination. also, the blaines have a telephone. they were probably one of the first in the nation to have a telephone. the phone rang. his daughter picked up and learned that he had won. she ran out into the front lawn where blaine was lying in a hammock. she said, you have won, father. you have won. that was how he learned the news. everybody marched up the hill from water street to greet their hero. a huge crowd gathered. then it started to rain. you heard a voice yelled out from the crowd - we have been

waiting 11 years for this rain. blaine said they were all getting soaked. he gave his speech then. everybody started pouring in here from all over the country. they had a train come from california which had the california delegates to the chicago convention. people started coming from all over the state of maine. all over the united states. john eventually called him black jack logan spent a few days with blaine. >> i want to thank you for adding to our rich knowledge of james g. blaine. one more thing before we say goodbye to you, "continental liar from the state of maine" is available wherever you buy books. our guests are part of our program as we learn more about this colorful and intellectual man from the 19th centur, known not only around the united states but around the world. north carolina, douglas watching us there. you're on the air.

>> i would like to ask you, what is blaine's relationship to joshua chamberlain? he was a republican. what was their relationship? >> as you mentioned, joshua chamberlain served four terms after the civil war. chamberlain was a very independent individual. he was not comfortable with blaine's brand of politics. i think there was ample evidence they did not get along that well. there were not close compatriots in the party. chamberlain did not go for their politics after the governorship. he became president of the college.

later on, he became collector of the port of portland. >> we had a callar that mention the towns that were named for james. we did a little bit of research. we found a number of cities and towns -- rather counties and towns named for james blaine -- mostly after the time around his death. can you talk a little bit more about honoring people -- especially james g. blaine in the communities around the country? >> one thing i heard what i've learned about that -- i thought about the fact that several of them are out west. i thought about his whole push for the western part in the 1880 hoping to build that with the chinese exclusion. i thought maybe he really did win some favors out west. i do not know if there is any connection.

it is interesting that this republican figure from maine, well-known, there was some clear support. >> san francisco, up next -- jim. >> thank you. most of blaine's history was during reconstruction. do you know to what degree he negotiated with southern whites? >> i am sure that he would have said that he stood firmly against the reassertion of power by southern whites. he was a moderate. he was in line with those who believed the nation should move forward. the radicals were really holding it back. the radicals were in favor of punishing the white southerners -- the rebels as best they could. i do not think it would have been in any way good politics for him to step up for white southerners. i do not think he was really strong going to take the position that they should be

punished. >> in that regard, can i ask you - what would have been the spots in the bill that would exclude citizenship? >> when he was throwing his hat in the ring he sponsored a bill that said that all of the remaining confederates, former confederates who had not been given amnesty should be given amnesty except jefferson davis which is interesting. >> how were those politics resounding with the nation? >> it provoked a great fight in congress. people felt this idea that you should hold jefferson davis accountable was great. others thought that plan was doing what they called waving the bloody shirt again. and here the nation was moving away from the war, and reconciliation seemed to be moving forward and why was he provoking this kind of dispute again? >> we have about five minutes

left. independence, iowa, this is joe. >> and joshua chamberlain, ulysses grant, william mckinley, blaine had no military record in the civil war. his running mate had won and was the first president of the great republican organizations throughout the states. did it cover the fact that blaine had not served? >> there is no question that was a political balance on the ticket. logan was very well-known. the veterans' vote was a very powerful force in the post civil war period in america. blaine, because he was very much involved in a emerging political career -- when the civil war broke out, he was speaker of the house in maine. he was about to run for congress. he did what many men did at the time. he actually bought a substitute. it cost about $300 to have someone else go instead. cleveland had done the same thing.

it was a very interesting situation that prior to the 1884 campaign, you always had someone in office and in the presidency -- grant and hayes and garfield, who had been civil war officers. blaine and cleveland were not. >> whoever had won, it would have been a break with that generation. >> we have a viewer who asks about his death. will you tell the story about his death? >> as it has been mentioned, he was a man who was prone to illness all his life. i think both real and imagined. there was always mention that he might have been more of a hypochondriac in reality. but at the same token, by 1892 he was exhausted both physically and mentally. in fact, the campaign of 1892 was looming. there was some talk of him being nominated for president. he really was not up to it. he gave only one speech during the campaign. it was on behalf of the reelection of harrison. early in 1893, he died at his home in washington. >> where is he buried? >> buried in augusta. originally buried in washington. as was his wife. the state of maine bought his remains back to augusta. they reside in a beautiful

blaine memorial here in augusta. >> how long did his wife live after him, do you know? >> until 1903, she lived another 10 years.

>> we have a local caller. augusta, maine, this is jonathan. >> what was the relationship between mr. blaine and the native population of the state? we know there were natives in the civil war that had regiments in the south. >> i am going to stop you there. our time is short. >> i am not sure i have a quick answer for that. >> is that right? any place to go for that?

is there material available? >> we definitely look to neil's book to start with. also the state library. >> i would like to close. we have just a minute left. i'd like to ask you the question. what was the legacy -- what is the importance to america today of james g. blaine having been a politician here? >> the biggest influx of secretary of state was very important. it was a great legacy. and his desire to build some contained of cohesion between the north america and south american and central american states. >> i think there is that. i think also if you look back across his long term career in public life is that he is one of the key builders of the republican party in the 19th century. he's there at the beginning in 1854, and he is still there almost 40 years later, as probably the most powerful and most identifiable figure. >> our state legislature is all republican. >> we are out of time. i want to thank a number of people as we close here, first

of all the host family for hosting us here at the governor's mansion. also the director of the blaine house here, and the staff has been fabulous. we really did take over the place, and they have been wonderful. the main historic preservation committee, thanks for your help and historic research, and to our wonderful cable affiliate here, time warner cable, for all of their help and support in bringing c-span to this committee. we'll close the program the same week we open it. we will give you look at the campaign memorabilia, and listening to a group called the independent silver band, as they sing the 1884 blaine-logan victory song. thanks for being

with us. hurrah, hurrah, hurrah [captioning performed by national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> next we hear from nancy pelosi. her remarks about 20 minutes. >> friday charles evans hughes. then on saturday, house met speaks on a liberal wing of the gop. the house of representatives

rejected a bill that extended the payroll tax cut and unemployment bills for two months. of the next half-hour, we breathe air the house debate in you hear reaction from president john boehner ainte and nancy pelosi. then a conversation about religion. and jim wallace of sojourn there. [captioning performed by national captioning institute] "washington journal" here on c-

span. >> then visit the congressional cemetery. the university of colorado. american prosperity in the '50s and '60s. they date back to the carter administration. monday highlights of coverage of the senate anniversary. experience american history television every weekend. >> surely after they rejected it, president obama spoke with reporters at the white house.

>> good afternoon, everybody. it is no secret that there has not been an abundance of partisanship in washington this year. what happened on saturday was a big deal. the entire senate, including all of the republicans, voted to prevent 160 million working americans from receiving a tax increase on january 1. the entire senate voted to make sure nearly 2.5 million americans were out there looking for a job, they will lose their unemployment insurance in the first two months of next year. just about everybody, democrats and republicans, committed to making sure that early next year, we find a way to extend the payroll tax cuts and unemployment insurance through the end of 2012. even though republicans and democrats in the senate were willing to compromise for the good of the country, a faction of republicans in the house are refusing to even vote on the senate bill. a bill that cuts taxes for 160 million americans. because of their refusal to cooperate, those americans could face a tax hike in just 11

days. millions of americans who are out there looking for work could find their unemployment insurance expired. let's be clear -- right now, the bipartisan compromise that was reached on saturday is the only viable way to prevent a tax hike on january 1. it is the only one. all of the leaders in congress, democrats and republicans, say they are committed to making sure we extend the payroll tax cut and unemployment insurance for the entire year.

by the way, this is something i call four months ago. the republican and democratic leaders of the senate worked on a one-year deal, made good progress, but determined that they needed more time to reach an agreement. that is why they passed an insurance policy to make sure that taxes do not go off on january 1. -- do not go up on january 1. the house republicans say they do not dispute a tax cut. they are holding out to wring concessions from democrats on issues that have nothing to do with the payroll tax cuts. issues were the party is fundamentally disagree. -- is used where the party is fundamentally disagree. it is focused on -- we want to focus on unemployment issues and not an extraneous issues. the clock is ticking. time is running out. as the house republicans refused

to vote for the senate bill, or even allow it to come up for a vote, taxes will go up in 11 days. i saw today the one of the house republicans referred to what they are doing as "high-stakes poker." he is right about the states, but this is not a game. it should not be politics as usual. right now, the recovery is for agile, but it is moving in the right direction. our failure to do this could have defects not just on families, but on the economy as a whole. it is not a game for the average family who does -- who does not have an extra $1,000 to lose. not a game for someone who is out there looking for work and might lose his house if unemployment insurance does not come through. it is not a game for the millions of americans who will take a hit when the entire economy grows more slowly because these proposals are not extended.

i just got back from a ceremony at andrews air force base and i met with some of the last men and women to return home from iraq, and these americans and all americans to serve are the embodiment of courage, selflessness, patriotism. when they fight together and sometimes die together, they do not care who is a democrat or republican and house somebody is doing in the polls. how this might play in the spin room. their work as a team, they do their job, and they do it for something bigger than themselves. the people in this town need to learn something from them. we have more important things to worry about than politics right now. we have more important things to worry about than saving face. or figuring out internal caucus politics. we have people who are counting on us to make their lives just a little bit easier, to build an economy where hard work pays off and responsibility is rewarded.

and we owe it to them to come together right now and do the right thing. that is what the senate did. democrats and republicans in the senate said, we are going to put our flights on other issues aside and do what is right. on something we all agreed to. let's go ahead and do it. we will have time later for the politics, we'll have time later to have fights around a whole bunch of other issues. right now, we know this is good for the economy. they went ahead and did the right thing. i need the speaker and house republicans to do the same. put politics aside. put aside issues where there are fundamental disagreements and come together on something we agree on. let's not play brinksmanship. the american people are weary of it.

they are tired of it. they expect better. i am calling on the speaker and the house republican leadership to bring up the senate bill for a vote. give the american people the assurance they need this holiday season. thank you. john boehner is a they should call them back into session. this is about 10 minutes.

ñqqq >> both leaders of congress have called for a yearlong extension of the payroll tax cut. the house passed a bill that would do just that. to extend and reform unemployment insurance, protect social security, and create jobs. we are proud of the bill that we passed. the house passed it with bipartisan support. we also understand that the senate passed a different bill. we oppose that bill because of the two-month extension will create more uncertainty for job creators and our country while millions of americans are out of work.

the payroll processing companies say the senate bill is unworkable and so complex that many americans may not even get the tax credit. today, we have voted to go to a formal conference to resolve the differences between the bills. this is a system that our founders gave us. it is as old as our nation and as clear as the constitution of. our house and gop negotiators are here and ready to work with their counterparts in the senate to resolve the differences as quickly as possible. our negotiators are kevin brady, david camp, rene l. worth, tom price, read -- tom reed, and greg walsh. it is up to the president to so -- to show real leadership. he said he will not leave for the holidays until this bill is done. the next step is clear -- president obama needs to call on senate democrats to go back into conference, and to sit down and resolve this bill as quickly as possible.

i sent a letter to the president today asking him to do just this. we have done our work for the american people. now it is up to the president and the democrats in the senate to do their jobs as well. with that, i will take a couple of questions. >> does this mean you'll have to cut more? >> and we have done our job. all we need to do now is resolve our differences. a two-month extension is nothing more than kicking the can down the road. the president asked us to do this for a full year. we did it for a full year. we offset the costs -- reasonable offsets.

there is no reason we cannot do this. several weeks ago, the house passed a dod authorization bill. in the period of less than a week, they were able to resolve a big differences in these large bills. there is no reason we cannot resolve this. >> if senator reid were to say we will get a deal here, would conference committee? and with that just be a passat for getting this problem solved? -- a facade for getting this problem solved? under regular order, the system that our founding fathers gave us. we will sit down and resolve the differences. >> are house members not to go on until it is solved? here, ready and able to work. members of the leadership will be here, ready and able to work. we will be available to do what needs to be done. the issue now is will the president engage with the senate democrats and bring them to the table so we can resolve this and give to the president

what he has asked us to give him, a one-year extension of these expiring programs and. said he appealed to you personally that i need john boehner to help out -- >> i need the president to help out. [laughter] [applause] >> i had a question. [laughter] he has asked you to help out and ask that you all take up the senate bill, which you have not done. any chance of that happening? >> the senate bill -- we have are taken up the senate bill. we rejected the senate bill and we moved to go to conference. under the rules of the congress, that means that the papers that were in our possession are on their way back to the united states senate.

>> the senate passed a two-month bill and the house passed a one-year bill. >> the senate voted to give the american people at $166 tax cut. people a $1,000 tax cut. this the right way. >> you guys have been working on this for weeks and have not been able to come to an agreement. do that now? >> we have not been working on this for weeks. i am going to make it clear -- i have told the senate leaders, senator reid and senator mcconnell, that there would be no negotiations with the house until the senate passed a bill. i meant what i said harry -- i meant what i said. when there were getting ready to

pass this and someone passed it on to me what it would look like, i made it clear to them that i was uncomfortable with where they were going. i express my displeasure. once again, taking the convenient route and not doing the people's work. thank you, everybody. [applause]

>> house democratic leaders also spoke with reporters. this is 20 minutes. >> it is just me. >> good afternoon. just when we think we have seen the last of the tether, here we are again. we are prepared to stay here until they drop does get done. the american people -- the job does get done. the american people will have a tax cut. democrats, republicans, independents, all have said one thing, they want us to work the other.

they want us to work together and they support the payroll tax cut for the middle class, 160 million people to benefit. they want us to work together to create jobs. the senate did just that. in a bipartisan way, they passed a payroll tax cut which continues the economic growth and the momentum of our economic growth and gets the tax cut into the pockets of the american people. it gave us hope. it gave us hope of he was an example of how we could work together in a bipartisan way, sharing a purpose which was to get the tax cut to the american people. the republicans of the house would not say doc would not take yes for an answer. they -- would not take yes for an answer.

they rejected the bipartisanship. they did not take yes for an answer because they are no on the tax cut. our whip will speak to the statements made by speaker boehner and others. osama until president obama took this message across the country -- it was not until president obama to this message across the country, the american people responded positively to it, 57% of republicans support the payroll tax that. we had the opportunity. we still have the opportunity to do that. we were hopeful we could take this up and our work would be done. apparently, the tea party is the elephant. the american people have a right. this is the fact. if we do not have a tax cut, if we do not have a payroll tax cut, it will be because of the

tea party minority within the republican majority. the tea party minority will be holding up the tax cut. republicans in the senate, republicans across the country support this. that is why they did not get a chance to vote on the bill. they were afraid they would lose. you see the speaker talking about process. what about results? the american people have the right to ask the question, like a putting process before a capital tax cut? -- why are you putting process before a payroll tax cut? we all wanted a one-year tax

cut. the senate said they needed more time. in the meantime, we would remove all doubt that this would be there for the next few months. there is time to negotiate how we go farther into the next year. right now, we have to remove all doubt that this tax cut will be there for the middle class. we have, on the house side, we introduced the senate bill -- reintroduced the senate bill. there are no barriers to as voting on this bill. thank you. this is a bill that has 170 co- sponsors.

thank you for your leadership. this is the reintroduced senate bill. there is no procedural process, whatever it is, obstacle to pass this bill. the speaker said our work is finished. it is not finished. we have work to do. i call upon the speaker to make sure we are in, regardless of how this goes, i hope we can accomplish it as soon as possible. regardless of how this goes, we should be here. why, when the american people are out of work, are we not working the first half of the month of january? with that i am pleased to yield. >> thank you for yielding. another little short-term gimmick. heard that phrase?

speaker boehner, june of this year. speaking about a one-year extension in the payroll tax. he called it then another little short-term gimmick. the proposition that 60 days is too short is not new to speaker boehner. he thought 1-year was too short. we have 11 days, 11 days before 160 million americans see their taxes go up. 2.3 million people seeking jobs it dropped from unemployment and 40 million on medicare have their access to doctors put at risk if we do not act. we could pass the senate bill this afternoon. send it to the president, provide certainty. the republicans talk a lot about certainty.

if any american, having watched the senate up rick for the last 12 months, has certainty in what they will do in the next 10 days, god bless them. they have not been watching closely. the fact is, we can give certainty to those 160 million americans. we can gesundheit -- certainty to the 48 million seniors. we can give certainty to the unemployed.

we have heard from the president, senate democrats, senate republicans, there is an agreement that the house must plena -- passed the short-term compromise -- house must test the short-term compromise -- pass the short-term compromise. the house has refused to bring the compromise to the floor. there is a lot of talk about not agreeing with the senate. this is the walk away caucus, with a walk-away leadership that is walking away from 160 million americans, 48 million seniors, the unemployed. on december 3, they walked away from the ball simpson commission -- bowles-simpson commission. in march, they walked away from a continuing resolution. 54 republicans walked out on their leadership. on april 14, 59 republicans walked away on their leadership.

on june 23, one man walked away from the biden talks. on july 22, speaker boehner walked away from the deal with the president. on august 1, 66 republicans walked away from a bill that would insure our nation pays its bills. on november 17, republicans walked away from a confidence vote. why is that important? that was their bill. not our bill, not even a senate bill. walking away is a pattern for them as you can see. they walked away from their leadership once again. november 21, they walked away from the committee on joint deficit reduction. just a few days ago, december

16, republicans walked away from an appropriations bill offered by the republican leadership. speaker boehner was in constant communication with mitch mcconnell. does anybody in the american public believe that mitch mcconnell would have agreed to an agreement he thought the republicans in the house were against when he has not done so? consistently not done so and said speaker boehner have to agree to this. is there any doubt that the speaker boehner agreed to this deal? what happened to it? the same thing that happened on each one of these occasions, his caucus walked away. they put at risk those 160 million americans who do not want to see their taxes go up.

put at risk as 48 million seniors who want to make with their doctors are going to see them. put at risk those 2.3 millioni e speaker of this house, take this bill up that we have introduced and passed it. then let us talk about extending this for one year. give us time. remove anxiety from those people of whom i talk. makes war that they do not lose the benefits we want them to have -- make sure that they do not lose the benefits we want them to have and bring our economy down. walking away is not the answer. now i will yield. >> walking away has consequences that we in the house on the democratic side

avoided. those who voted against the legislation that would prevent a default, even though it was there bill, they're people did not vote for it. the democrats did vote for it. so that the full faith and credit of the united states would be upheld. 66 of them voted against a republican bill. we did not like the bill. the choices we had made it imperative that we do what was right for the american people and not say, it is not the bill that i wanted. we are prepared to take a few questions. we have to go back to the floor. >> john boehner has named people -- conferees to the conference. are you not in some way blamed?

by not naming your conferees? >> there is a bill that has passed the senate that was designed to pass. the republicans put forth a path that is designed to fail. the bill the republicans passed in the house was not even brought up. the republicans objected to it being brought up. they knew it would fail. the bill in the house was not brought up because the senate bill -- because they knew it would pass. he is not lucy, i am not charlie brown, we are not falling for that football stunt again. senator mitch mcconnell fell for it. we are not falling for it. this is about not getting a bill passed. the stalemate is that there is a bill that can pass, that can be signed at this very day. there is plenty of time to talk

about the one-year proposal. they have never been for it. they were not for it in june. they were not for it as a one- year bill at that time. it was only that the president made this bill too hot for them to handle. the fact is a clear one, if we do not have the payroll tax cut, it is because republicans in the house have chosen to paint themselves in a different way than republicans in the country and the senate. they are isolating themselves. i will not play charlie brown to the embassy -- to their lucy. they have pulled this football every single time. we will not let them mislead the american people. anybody chime and. >> both the house and senate have a provision forcing the president to make a decision on keystone.

something not necessarily popular with in your caucus. what should be done about he's done? >> the president needs to make a decision. -- about keystone? what is the president needs to make a decision. -- >> the president needs to make a decision. it is a bill that can get the tax cut done in a timely fashion. democrats stood ready to support that bill. >> you bring up a perfect example. heller position is not our way -- our position is not our way or the highway. we understand you have to make compromises. some media not like paid for the country and for those 160 million people -- some of you do not like. for the country and for those 106 demint people, -- 160 million people, we are making compromises. not because we agree with that particular position, but because

we know that is how the legislative process works. unfortunately, the walk-away caucus has not learned that lesson. >> some thought both sides were close in terms of reaching an agreement. on a one-year deal. does that sound correct? >> i did not think that is at all. if that were the case, we should come back the first week in january and get to work on the one-year deal. let us pass the senate bill. so that we remove all doubt in the public's mind. there is an allusion going on -- illusion going on that republican support a payroll tax cut. the record shows they have now. -- they have not. that bipartisanship and working together is something they would like to achieve, not so. they are not honoring what the senate did. whatever they say is irrelevant. what they do is what is

important. what they are doing is not giving a payroll tax cut to 160 million americans. >> they cut 40 because of of unemployment insurance. the 0.3 million people -- 40 weeks out of unemployment insurance. 3.3 million people could lose insurance. for him to talk about 90%, it is totally self-serving. they need to step up to the plate today and pass the bill that a vast majority of senate -- of republicans in the senate voted for. including every single member of the republican leadership, every single member. i think all of you should ask them, why not bring it up for a boat? -- vote? it would pass. they did not want those who voted no to be on record. it is as simple as that.

if you have not ask that question, please ask them. why not bring this up for a vote? >> we have gone down the path of compromise. he pointed out one area where we did not have unanimity. in our caucus, the keystone pipeline. it does not belong in this bill. there are other provisions that do not belong. they have nothing to do with the subject. in addition, payroll tax cuts -- for 160 million americans, and they do not believe in unemployment benefits to those who need them. millions of people will be cut up under their plan. they will now lose the benefit because of the republicans in the house of the present this. ned -- some of them -- house of representatives. some of them have no other means of income.

this is bad for those families. it is bad for our economy and job creation. the public has to be concerned and wondering why are we not getting a payroll tax cut when everyone says they are for it? those of us who say we are for it are for it. many on the republican side are for it. they have voted that way. the republican leadership in the house is not. this is a stalling tactic. charlie brown is not falling for that trip. -- trick. >> will democrat be leaving after this series? >> we are here as long as it takes. >> if the senate does not reconvene is there another way to avoid the cuts? is there an option? [captioning performed by

national captioning institute] [captions copyright national cable satellite corp. 2011] >> house leader spoke with reporters. this is a little more than an hour. i would say, mr. speaker, our economy is too weak and the american people have been struggling for far too long for congress not to work out our differences. america is not on vacation nor should the senate be. we have two weeks to find a solution and send something to the president for his signature. that is what house republicans are proposing today. let's look at the differences between the house and the senate. the house extended unemployment for 13 months. the senate bill extended unemployment benefits for only two months. meaning an estimated four million americans could lose the extended unemployment benefits next year they would get under the house bill. the house reformed the unemployment reform to focus it on getting the people the

training and education they need to get back to work, not just handing out checks. the senate did not. the house protected seniors' health care for the next two years by ensuring doctors in the medicare program don't have their reimbursement cut by more than 27%. the senate did this for only two months. the house provided a one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday ensuring a worker earning $50,000 next year has $1,000 more in their pocket. the senate did this for only two months meaning that the same worker would have less than $200 in their pocket or $800 less in take-home pay than under the house-passed bill. the house had a pay freeze for federal workers. the senate did not. the house prevented welfare benefits being used at liquor stores and strip clubs. the senate did not. the house protected social security by reducing overpayments. the senate did not. the house included a provision that saves taxpayers $9 billion by cracking down on fraud and

abuse that is known to exist in the refundable -- in a refundable tax credit program. the senate did not. the house provided for economic growth and job creation in the high-tech industry through spectrum auctions. the senate did not. the house cut taxes to promote business investment and hiring. the senate did not. mr. speaker, while it may sound like there are grave differences between the house and senate bill. it's not a difference over policy. it's simply a difference of the house deciding to act and the senate deciding not to act on so many items. the house bill includes commonsense reforms the american people want, and it adopts a number of the president's legislative initiatives which represent the bipartisan cooperation the american people are demanding. all told, 90% of the house bill is paid for with policies the president has endorsed in one form or another. so what's really standing in our way? i've heard the president's people say it breaks the agreement over the

discretionary caps in the budgetary control act, but look at that talking point. those caps are adjusted only because we are proposing as the president has before to freeze the pay of members of congress and other federal workers. do the president and the senate really want to risk unemployment benefits on middle-class tax cuts and reimbursement to doctors treating seniors and those with disabilities because they don't want to freeze the pay for members of congress and federal workers? mr. speaker, it's not too late. i urge all of my colleagues to support a one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday, one year of unemployment benefits with critical reforms and a two-year extension of reimbursements for medicare doctors. i urge my democrat colleagues to name conference committee members to resolve the differences between the two bills. conference committees are a jeffersonian concept and we would be wise to follow the models laid out by our founding fathers. if the senate agrees to work

together we will help the american people back to work and get those struggling in this economy the help they need, and i reserve the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i yield myself such time as i may consume. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized. mr. levin: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. levin letchhet me put this -- mr. levin: let me put this very simply. this is a dishonest procedure. this is a reuss to avoid a straight -- radios to avoid a straight up or down -- ruse to avoid a straight up or down vote on the payroll tax extension. why not do it as called by regular order? that is regular order.

because the republican majority is afraid of a straight vote. they are afraid some republicans would vote yes and the senate bill would pass and the president would sign it and it would become law today. and they don't want other republicans on record voting against a payroll tax cut. that is the epitome of a ruse. 39 republican senators, 39, all but a handful voted for the bill before us. but what has happened since saturday's bipartisan senate bill that speaker boehner said was a good deal? well, the -- they staged a mutiny. and the captain decided to surrender. he decided to join the mutiny to keep the ship from coming to

port. but the problem is onboard is millions of passengers waiting to dock. this chart shows the number of passengers. 160 million americans would see their taxes increase. 2.3 million americans onboard looking for work would lose their critical unemployment benefits. and 48 million seniors, americans on medicare will have access to their doctors they know and they trust would have them jeopardized. so i want to clear, for these people, all of these people,

the republican vote today is a vote to nowhere. dick lugar said that. i'm hopeful there are a majority of republicans and democrats today who will proceed because it seems to me it is best for the country as well as all the individuals who are affected. another republican, senator from massachusetts, i quote, house republicans' plan to scuttle -- that's the correct word -- the deal to help middle-class families is irresponsible and wrong. the refusal to compromise now threatens to increase taxes on hardworking americans and stop unemployment benefits for those out of work. we cannot allow rigid partisan ideology and unwillingness to crow mize stand in the way of working together for the good

of the american people. and a third republican senator, senator heller, a former colleague here of nevada, i quote, there's no reason to hold up the short-term extension while a more comprehensive deal is worked out. and i want to quote a letter -- a statement from treasury about the notion that the two-month extension cannot be implemented. and i quote, while any short-term extension is bound to create some administration -- administrative complexities, it is feasible to implement the bipartisan bill. it is feasible to implement the bipartisan senate bill. this is treasury that is in charge of implementation of this. and the treasury department will work with employers to ensure the smoothest possible implementation. in the current economic situation, any such complications will be

outweighed by the economic benefits of ensuring that taxes do not impup on 160 million americans starting on january 1, and i ask unanimous consent that this be placed in the congressional record. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. levin: i want to close with what harry reid said. take it seriously. 39 republicans and 50 democrats voted for the bill you won't let us vote on. you will not let us vote on. and i quote, i have always -- i have been trying to forge one for weeks. he could have said for months. and i'm happy to continue negotiating one once we have made sure middle-class families will not wake up to a tax increase on january 1. so before we reopen

negotiations on a year-long extension, the house of representatives must protect middle-class families by passing the overwhelmingly bipartisan compromise that republicans negotiated and was approved by 90% of the senate. end of quote. you will snubbing a bipartisan compromise. you are jeopardizing the lives of millions of taxpayers, millions of the unemployed and millions of seniors. . to keep harmony within your ranks. you are creating the possibility of a -- of immense discord within the united states of america. we are not going to let you do it. i reserve the balance of my time.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, reserves. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: thank you, mr. speaker. i yield two minutes to the distinguished chairman of the health subcommittee, the gentleman from california, mr. herger. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. herger: mr. speaker, taxpayers, small businesses, and health care providers need certainty and predictibility to plan for the future. unfortunately the bill that's come back to us from the other chamber makes our usual habit of only one year-long extensions look responsible by comparison. the senate bill extends a number of key policies, including the pact preventing a steep cut to doctors' medicare payment for just two months. mr. speaker, we have been down this road before. last year under the previous majority congress passed five separate extensions of medicare

physician payment, mostly for just a month or two. several times the deadline meaning payment cuts tookt effect and had to be reversed. the failure to responsibly address the s.g.r. created an unprecedented amount of chaos and confusion, both for doctors and the medicare agency. house republicans have been determined not to let this happen again. that's why we passed a fully paid for two-year fix. the american people are tired of congress wasting time on political stunts and waiting until the last minute to cobble together half measures. mr. speaker, we still have two weeks before the end of the year to get this right. and there's no reason to think we'll do better in two months.

i urge my colleagues to support the motion to go to conference so we can get a responsible solution. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i yield two minutes to a very senior member of our committee, the very distinguished gentleman from new york, mr. rangel. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from new york is recognized for two minutes. mr. rangel: i ask unanimous consent to revise and extend my remarks. the speaker pro tempore: without objection. mr. rangel: i am amazed at the ability of the majority to change its position so fast. sometimes i wish democrats had the ability to do this. it wasn't too long ago that there was objection for the taxpayers' holiday because of the impact on social security. then there as objection to the unemployment insurance because people on the other side said

people wouldn't go look for a job. that they would just stay home and watch television and receive the check. and of course no one can deny that the doctors that prepare -- that give care to 48 million people deserve compensation to what they do. but being here as long as i have, i can see how in the majority a handful of people will try to prove that their constituents that they are not marching in line with regular order. they would come down here to go along with their senate or leadership, and it's kind of rough to be a part of a party that is so widely split. i had only hoped that they could come up with a better excuse than the fact that two months is not enough time to prevent an increase in the taxes of so many, 160 million

people, and i know that everyone in this chamber knows that if the american people that will suffer such a painful , insensitive act was to ask what you wanted for two months and then have the congress to extend it? would you take that or would you want it to be for one year and the possibility of getting absolutely nothing? that is such a fearful, such a cruel thing to do to gamble with other people's ability to be able to enjoy this holiday season as best they can. and so i don't think that there will be any winners in what's going on today, but i hope that the regular republicans would be able to see their way clear. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camep: -- mr. camp: i yield one minute to

the distinguished gentleman from florida, mr. west. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from florida is recognized for one minute. mr. west: thank you, mr. chairman, mr. speaker. last week we voted to have a one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday. last week we voted to a one-year extension of unemployment insurance with reforms. last week we voted to have a two-year suspension of the sustained growth rate for the doctors that provided the care. last year we voted for certainty and voted to restore confidence. we voted for a measure that was paid for, would have no detriment or negative outcomes to social security. last week we voted for job creating policies and a bill that had 10 to 12 obama approved provisions. we are not afraid to vote. and if you don't want to accept this measure, then continue to vote no. just the same as our colleagues from across the aisle last week voted no. they voted no against what president obama wanted. they voted no against what senator harry reid said he wanted. they voted no against what

senator chuck schumer said he wanted. the senate sent us back a two-month extension which is irresponsible and cannot be implemented. and it reflects abject incompetence. i urge all of my house colleagues to vote yes on this motion to disagree with the irresponsible senate amendment and move the conference. or do we just want to continue to see the miracle of people suffer? thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield a minute and a half to the distinguished gentleman from washington, mr. mcdermott. the speaker pro tempore: without objection, the gentleman from washington is recognized. mr. mcdermott: mr. speaker, a famous speech started that we will little note nor long remember what we say here today. but the people, the bible says, by your deeds you shall know

them. the republicans have said that it's christmastime. kids are hangling their -- hanging their socks all over the world. and they are all getting up and hoping there will be something in that sock on christmas day. and the republicans have something to put in it. they have a lump of coal. they are going to say to 160 million people, we are going to boost your taxes, here your christmas gift, right? we are going to say to 2.5 million unemployed people, no unemployment benefits because it's only for two months and we can't -- there's every excuse in the book you can give, but when they get up on christmas, there's going to be coal in their sock. the working poor of this country are counting on that

tax break. they have gone out and bought gifts for their kids and they think they are going to pay for them because they have this tax reduction. and you are taking it away from them after they spent the money on the christmas gifts. that's your lump of coal to the middle class. now, for the seniors the lump of coal is, we are not going to pay the doctors, we are going to cut the doctors by 25%. and doctors are going to say, i'm going to limit the number of seniors. remember the lump of coal in november of 2012, folks. they gave it to you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: at this time i yield one minute to the distinguished majority leader. the speaker pro tempore: the majority leader is recognized for one minute. mr. cantor: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from michigan. mr. speaker, tonight's the first night in hanukkah and christmas is fast approaching for families across america. and what do the families see

coming out of washington? dysfunction. and half of congress unwilling to do its job. mr. speaker, we were elected to work for the best interest of the american people. and in this tough economy, middle class americans and working families need to know that their taxes won't be going up at any point next year. so far the house has passed a bipartisan year-long plan to ensure that taxes do not go up. the senate on the other hand has passed a two-month plan. according to experts, the two-month plan is simply unworkable. families, employers, and workers can't live their lives month to month. washington needs to stop adding confusion and more uncertainty to people's lives. i think we can all agree that the two-month concept doesn't make a whole lot of sense.

mr. speaker, bottom line, a two-month patch is irresponsible. that's why the house is taking a stand. we believe all americans deserve certainty. we want a year-long extension of the payroll tax cut which will prevent a tax increase on every american with a job. luckily, mr. speaker, everyone claims to agree. in fact, the president himself said, it would be inexcusable not to extend the payroll tax cut for a year. the leader of the senate says that we should be working on extending the payroll tax for a year. but only after the new year. mr. speaker, a great virginian once said, never put off tomorrow what you can do today. that man was thomas jefferson. so let us dedicate ourself to that spirit. people across our great country

are tired of hearing why washington cannot do things. they are seeing say in and day out that washington is not working together. but we have the ability to give them some hope. let's show the american people that there's a reason to believe that we can work together and deliver results. the truth is, we are not far apart on this issue. the negotiators got extremely close. we owe some stability and good tax policy to the hardworking people of this country not more gimmicks and political games. today this house will vote to go to conference and work these differences out in regular order. we need to come together in a responsible manner to find common ground where we can accomplish everyone's goal of a year-long payroll tax extension. mr. speaker, there is no reason

why the house, the senate, and the president cannot spend the next two weeks working to get that done. america will be waiting. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield two minutes to another distinguished member of our committee, mr. neal, from the great state of massachusetts. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from massachusetts. mr. neal: thank you, mr. speaker. if just the speaker house, and majority leader could work together. there was a deal over the week end. the speaker of the house accepted the senate's version of that agreement. only to discover in a conference call that he had to back down. the chairman of the ways and means committee, my friend, he doesn't believe what they are doing here for one moment. they are courting disaster. this is the season of advent and christmas for christians.

hanukkah begins today. it is the quest for light in our lives to enlighten the american people as to what is taking place here today. 160 million americans are going to lose this tax cut. organized labor and management, they do this all the time. you have a cooling off period. you get to a more benign time. and you negotiate in good faith. you have seen what's happened here. a radical element has seized the republican party. the senator from massachusetts, senator brown, is on the front page of the "boston globe" today criticizing his own party. dean heller criticizing his own party. richard lugar criticizing his own party. we are arguing today about unemployment benefits in this season for members of the american family who are going to lose those benefits. we are arguing about tax cut for middle income americans

today, 160 million strong. for doctors who care for the most vulnerable amongst us as the medicare patients. over their reimbursement rates. when you consider what republicans did during the bush years with those tax cuts for wealthy people, they never flinched for one moment. the rich were rich and they weren't going to take it anymore. . and therm going to reinforce that idea, cut taxes 10 times in 10 years for the wealthiest among us, we should be voting on what the senate did. let's have an up or down vote and then explain it to the american people. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: mr. speaker, i yield two minutes to the distinguished chairman of the trade subcommittee, the gentleman from texas, mr. brady. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for two minutes. mr. brady: mr. president,

senate democrat leaders, don't vacation until you finish your job. families and small businesses need tax relief for a full year, not just for two months. the house, we've already done our job. we've already passed a full one-year extension of the payroll tax holiday. we've included unemployment reforms for those who are out of work, paying our local doctors fairly in medicare for a full two years, unlocking the keystone pipeline and cutting spending to completely pay for it. we've done our job, but the democrat-led senate shortchanged the american public by rushing through a partial two-month extension and then hurrying home for their christmas vacation. that's irresponsible. families and small businesses need to be able to plan with confidence for a full year, not just two measly months. president obama said -- you said, mr. president, just last

week that the american people deserve a one-year bill. our democratic friends said a one-year bill. the democrats said a one-year bill. well, house republicans are going to hold you to your word by moving forward today to conference committee to work out the differences. we're going to work it out not next year, not when you get around to it but now. that's the next step in the constitutional process and we, house republicans, are willing to work through the holidays to make sure we get the job done for the american public. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i now yield one minute to the gentleman from georgia, a very distinguished member of our committee, mr. lewis. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from georgia is recognized for one minute. mr. lewis: mr. speaker, i want

to thank my friend and my colleague, mr. levin, for yielding. if we go home without passing a bipartisan senate bill we degrade ourselves and this congress. we are out of time. we cannot impinto this holiday season -- we cannot go into this holiday season without helping our unemployed brothers and sisters. we cannot keep our seniors from seeing their doctors. we cannot allow taxes to go up for millions of americans. what is happening here today is shameful, it is a disgrace. it is unreal. it is unbelievable. we can do better. if we fail today, how will you face your neighbors, family who are suffering? where is your compassion?

where is your heart? where is your soul? i say vote no on this motion and pass the senate bipartisan bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: at this time i yield four minutes to the distinguished conference chairman, the gentleman from texas. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from texas is recognized for four minutes. mr. hensarling: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, we all need to be reminded why we're here in the first place. we're here because the president's economic policies have failed. they failed this nation. ever since he was elected, unemployment has been at, near or above 9%. and the people suffer. i believe almost every member of this body believes that we must extend the payroll tax holiday. that's not the debate, mr. speaker.

what is most curious, though, is our president. our president has said it will be inexcusable for congress not to further extend this middle-class tax cut for the rest of the year. he didn't say 60 days. he said the rest of the year. the democratic leader has said that she intends the fight to extend these provisions for a full year. and so, mr. speaker, i guess i'm confused. i hear my friends on the other side of the aisle say they want to do this for a year. they say they want to do it for a year. they're just not willing to vote to do it for a year. that's most curious, mr. speaker. i don't think i understand it. it's what the president asked for. it's what the american people deserve. they don't want us to punt the ball. they want us to do our job. and so there's no point of contention on whether or not it should be extended. the question is whether we're going to do it for a full year or punt the ball down the field

and once again disappoint the american people. we stand ready to work over the holidays to get this done. that's the question. are you willing to work over the holidays or are you not willing to work over the holidays? the american people, most of them will have to work over the holidays. why shouldn't we be willing to do this? and, you know, mr. speaker, i guess it's curious how many people are unaware of this thing called a conference committee. since the dawn of the republican, these are how things are settled between the house and senate. if you don't remember sisks 101 -- civics 101, you can go and watch "schoolhouse rocks" video. they will appoint conferees and come negotiate in good faith except the senate democratic leader said he wouldn't do it. the house democratic leader said she wouldn't do it. so it kind of begs the question, mr. speaker.

do they want to make laws that benefit the american people at a time of need or do they want to perpetuate a campaign issue that maybe they believe helps their campaigns? that's really the question. and last but not least, mr. speaker, we ought to pass laws that actually work around here. abc news reported last night, quote, holiday passed by senate, pushed by president cannot be implemented properly, experts say. well, isn't that interesting. the national payroll reporting consortium that handles payroll for about a third of the private economy said, quote, this could create substantial problems, confusion and cost affecting a significant percentage of u.s. employers and employees. the associated builders of contractors, the people who go out and actually build things in america have said, quote, this sort of temporary fix underscores congress' uneven ad

hoc approach toward the economy and causes more harm than good for america's job creators. the leading building trade association in the nation said their 60-day plan will cause more harm than good. mr. speaker, house republicans have craft a good and reasonable bill. it's one year that does what the president asked us to do. it does what the american people asks us to do. it's actually paid for. it doesn't increase the deficit, and it blocks tax increases. i don't know how my friends on the other side of the aisle think we will do this without it. thank you. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: it's now my privilege to yield two minutes to another member of our committee, a distinguished gentleman from california, javier becerra.

the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from california is recognized for two minutes. mr. becerra: i thank the gentleman for yielding. my friends, we've seen this movie before. house republicans once again are driving our government and our economy to the edge of the cliff and this time they replaced 160 million workers and millions of seniors in the front seat of that car. they are refusing to allow 435 members of this house to vote on a bipartisan proposal passed by 89 out of 100 senators next door. my republican colleagues know that this bipartisan bill passed by the senate would pass on this floor and it would save working americans from having their taxes increased during the holidays. the truth is republicans are feuding amongst themselves. house republicans are fighting

with senate republicans and quite frankly they're fighting with republicans throughout this country because a majority of them support the president's payroll tax cut. mr. speaker, once again the people, republicans and democrats alike, are way ahead of the politicians. they want us to get our work done and get it done now. let's stop showing the american people b-rated movies on the floor of the house and pass the senate bipartisan legislation. i yield back the balance of my time. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i yield three minutes to a distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentleman from louisiana, dr. boustany. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from louisiana is recognized for three minutes. ms. hanabusa: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank -- mr. boustany: thank you, mr. speaker. before coming to congress i was a cardiovascular surgeon. just like doctors all over this country, we're there 24/7 to

deal with problems. now, i remember distinctly one night christmas eve, in fact, i was getting ready to sit down with my family for dinner and an 86-year-old man had a ruptured an rism who went into shock. we saved his life, long story short. we had a duty, an obligation to our patients. by god, to put physicians in a position of seeing a 27%, 28% cut in reimbursement is just untenable. why? it's not because of the positions. it's because of patients who are going to lose access. medicare beneficiaries, seniors, those with disabilities who will lose access to care in a situation where we're already seeing that eroding access. we have an obligation to act because the consequences are not good. with regard to all these provisions that we're trying to

extend. this house passed a bill last week. it was a very responsible bill with good reforms, and it gives two years' stability period for physicians and those patients who desperately need this care. and what did the senate do? what did the senate do? the senate capitulated, the senate caved and the senate basically just gave up with contempt for the american people. that's what it comes down to. they basically are content with allowing confusion and disruption and chaos and uncertainty for patients who deserve good, high-quality care. they did the same thing to those who depend on these unemployment benefits and the same, and the same for those who depend on this payroll tax cut during this holiday season. we're going to pass a bill today that basically says we're going -- we want to go to

conference to resolve these differences and the senate has an obligation to the american people to stand with us and follow its constitutional duty to go to conference to resolve these disputes, these differences in a time-honored way. mr. speaker, the senate has an obligation to the american people. the senate has an obligation to carry out its duty to the american people. we can get this right. let's do it and be done with it, but let's get it done and let's get it done right and i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, has 10 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan -- 10 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, has 15 1/2 minutes remaining. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: thank you. i now yield two minutes to another distinguished member of our committee, the gentleman from oregon, mr. blumenauer. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from oregon is recognized for two minutes. mr. blumenauer: i thank the

gentleman. some say that the house republican leadership pulled the plug on the senate bipartisan bill because they were afraid of their republican tea party freshmen perhaps. but what is clear is that we're not being allowed by the republican leadership to vote on the senate bill because the republicans are afraid of their moderates, their independents, their reasonable, unhardliners. the measure of this congress is that the house doesn't act until they are forced to as a result of self-imposed, crisis-induced deadlines. and then if they can't get their own way on an agenda that could never be passed through regular order in both chambers and signed by the president, then they throw a tantrum. and what we are dealing with today is a legislative tantrum. .

i don't like the two-month extension. it has some difficulties and uncertainties, but there will be far more uncertainty and difficulty if there were a two-week gap or a two-month gap. where 700,000 people in early january will lose their unemployment benefits. two million in the next two months. if we simply would follow regular order, allow a vote on the senate, we could build on this glimmer of bipartisanship from the other body. allow your members to vote. who knows where it could lead. we actually may be able to solve some of these long-term problems. thank you, i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i would ask if mr. levin would like to yield again to even up the time. mr. levin: thank you. i now yield two minutes to another distinguished member of

our committee, mr. pascrell, of the great state of new jersey. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman is recognized for two minutes. mr. pascrell: almost good afternoon, mr. speaker. this is not a fraternity house. this is the house of representatives. yet what have we wrought? i heard someone, two people say on this floor, quoted the president of the united states, they should apologize to him immediately, that the president was urging us to vote a one-year plan. he wasn't asking us to vote on your plan for a year. you know what he thinks about what you proposed. and it didn't even come up in the senate. in fact, 39 republicans, that's 82% of the entire delegation of the republican senate, and 89% of the total senate voted for

this compromise. i know you hate the word. compromise is -- does not mean you surrender your values or principles. compromise is what was the basis of the forefathers. that's how we got a constitution. nobody was happy with that constitution. they didn't get everything they want and you're not going to get everything you want. so you better get it out of your head right now. through the speaker, through the speaker. the majority leader, wonderful cliches, he forgets that only two years ago a republican member of the house sponsored a two-month payroll tax holiday and had 59 co-sponsors. we have amnesia, selective amnesia. he changed his tune this saturday. he was against the idea of a short-term gimmick. this saturday he said it's a good deal. it's a victory, he said. he claimed victory. reminds me of another victory i heard a couple years ago.

once the same members of this party in this caucus rebell, the speaker reversed his course. keeping the payroll tax cut in place as we figure out a way to extend it for the year, reduces uncertainty among employers and the families in my district, the workers of my district, and i ask that we reconsider what we are doing today. thank you, mr. speaker. have a wonderful day. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. members are reminded to address their remarks to the chair and not other members of the body. the chair will now recognizes the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman kansas, ms. jenkins. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman kansas is recognized tore two minutes. miss jenkins: i thank the gentleman for yielding. mr. speaker, folks are mad out there. they are mad because what congress is doing or not doing in many cases makes absolutely no sense. as a c.p.a. i'll tell you that

handling tax policy on a month to month basis isn't just irresponsible, it's down right crazy. according to the nonpartisan national payroll reporting consortium, the cost of complying with the two-month extension proposed by the senate may actually harm many small businesses. in fact, implementing the cuts on this short timeline may not even be possible. in addition to being a c.p.a., i'm also a mom. and i do just about anything to be working out of our topeka office this time of year so that i could spend the evening with my kids, but agreeing to a tax policy that is so short lived that it costs not just our government but also our small businesses big bucks is not one of them. the american people are exhausted. they are sick and tired of congress kicking the can down the road on hard decisions. so i can our leaders in the senate, are your vacation plans

more important than good policy? why will it be easier to negotiate a deal in february than it is today? come back. we still have time. work with us to do the job we were elected to do. let's make the hard decisions today. let's extend the payroll tax cut for the entire year and let's not do it on the backs of a generation more focused on santa right now than they are on tax policy. i yield back. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlelady yields back. the gentleman from michigan, mr. levin, is recognized. mr. levin: i yield three minutes to the gentleman from maryland, mr. van hollen, who is ranking on the budget committee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is recognized for three minutes. mr. van hollen: thank you, mr. speaker. i thank the gentleman from michigan. the american people should understand very clearly what's going on here right now. and that is that the republican majority in this house of representatives is refusing, is refusing to allow a vote in this house on the senate

bipartisan compromise. they are refusing to even allow a vote on a bill that received 89 of 100 votes in the senate, including 85% of the senate republicans. what are they so afraid of? it's very clear that the republican leadership is afraid that that same bipartisanship that took place in the senate will take place right here in the house. because they don't want a bipartisan bill. otherwise we would have a vote on it. what we are witnessing today, mr. speaker, is the triumph of tea party extremism over the good of the country. the sad part is we probably shouldn't be surprised because it was just a few months ago that the republican leadership was opposed to extending the payroll tax cut at all. they originally said that raising taxes on 160 million americans would be ok. no problem. i have a long list of statements from republican house leaders to that effect. then two things happened.

a whole lot of economists told us what was common sense, that in fact if you raise taxes on 160 million americans, it will hurt the economy. and it also begins to sound a little strange for our republican colleagues to be skellously -- zealously protecting tax breaks for special interests and millionaires while allowing tax increases on 160 million americans. so they changed their story. then it was we couldn't do this because it was going to hurt the social security trust fund. that coming from the party that wanted to privatize social security. and then the social security actuary told us and the country that it wouldn't take one cent from the social security trust fund. so now we have a whole different story today. now the same folks who were opposed to any continuation of the payroll tax cut say they oppose the bipartisan senate bill because it was only for two months. now they are preventing a vote on that bill.

the consequence is going to be very clear. january 1, 160 million americans are going to see their payroll taxes increase. at the end of the day the republican majority here in the house is going to go home, they are going to go home, but you know what will remain here? the senate bipartisan bill because we will never have voted for it. so at any time in the next several weeks we can all come right back here and in a matter of five minutes send that bill to the president's desk which he said he will sign and make sure that we avoid a payroll tax increase on 160 million americans. make sure folks who are unemployed through no fault of their own get unemployment compensation. make sure that doctors will continue to be paid when they treat medicare patients so they can serve those patients. it will be sitting right here for three weeks. why? because the republican majority won't let us vote on it. i would be happy to yield 30 seconds to my friend, the chairman of the ways and means committee, to tell us why you

refuse to a lou--allow a vote on the senate bipartisan bill. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman's time has expired. the gentleman from michigan, mr. camp, is recognized. mr. camp: i would just say that if minority leader pelosi and senator reid appoint conferees, there is no reason for taxes to go up. with that i yield -- mr. van hollen: you didn't answer my question. mr. camp: regular order. the speaker pro tempore: the gentleman from maryland is out of order. the gentleman from michigan is recognized. mr. camp: i yield two minutes to the distinguished member of the ways and means committee, the gentlewoman from tennessee. the speaker pro tempore: the gentlewoman from tennessee is recognized for two minutes. mrs. black: thank you, mr. speaker. fixing something for two months is not fixing something. it's a band-aid and it's bad policy. i have been a nurse for over 40 years and i'm going to use a medical analogy to illustrate this point. if someone were to come into the emergency where i'm working with an issue, medical issue, and i said to them, i'll give you a choice. we can either fix your problem for two months or we can fix

your problem for a year. i have no doubt that the patient would choose certainty of one year over two months. for the past 10 months i have been visiting individuals and businesses in my district and what i continually hear from them is that uncertainty is hurting them and it's hurting our economy. now, the house sent a bill to the senate that contains some certainty. and we get back a two-month band-aid. in this bill we had certainty for businesses. certainty for doctors. certainty for individual taxpayers. and certainty for our seniors. there is a need for a two-year extension on the medicare reimbursement for our doctors to ensure that seniors receive access to care. there is a need for a one-year payroll holiday for individuals payroll holiday for individuals and businesses